COUF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : DEVISiON COI HON'BLfc SHRI S.R. NAYAK, C.J. HON'I APPELLANT •f%'fi^s ^t."5al51 'ff^si^.ST ^t^.^. ^ ij'BUM-A^'I^UwAN) NU.Si ?BS?" KaSPONDENTS {APPLICATNT1J Vs. Ths New indla Assurance Company Ljmitsd, 32 East cast Chamber nrst fioor S.N. Cify Road T. Nagar, Chennai, rnh itf^fi^t/ Through : Divislonai - Offlce, Diyisiona! Manager, The New !ndja Assurance Company Limlt°d, Kuchery C'nowk, h4adina Buiiding, Ralpur, (C.G.) Smt. Chansia' Patel W/o. Late Dwarka Patei, aged ~ 24 years, (APPLICANT No. 'APPLJCAMT (APPLICANT No.41 fNON-APPLiCANT No.t 6. Ruisesh Kumar Patsl S/o. Late Dwarka Pate!, aged - 4 years, Ganshyam Patel S/o Late Dwarka Patel, aged - 50 years, Smt. Bi'iasha Pate! W/o Ghanshyam Pate! aged 48 years, Res. Nc.(2) M'nior-through-momer Smt. Chanda Patei (Res. No.1) A'il are R/o- viliage - Sirpur, P.0. iaiauda, Tahsii - Saraipali, Dlstt.- Fvlahasamund (C.G.) inder Singh S/'o Shri iviang Singh, A.ged 24 years. R/0 Nandia jasara, Osin, Jodhpur, DEstt. - Jodhpur (Rajasthan) C/b M.P. transport, Hlrapur Road, Mahoba Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) (Driver) Rup Ram Choudhar;' S/o Najna Ram Choudhary Aged - 45 years, R/o- Near Krishna Mandir, Piot no. 157 A, Bhagat Ki Kothi, Jodhpur, Distt. Jodhpur, (Rajasthan) /*h EE ^ • ^tF-*-^i ^tt"*^t?-^ t'-S.^^ ^—^=?F^ 1-'^ ^i^/3:T^^/^.^ /pl/\F i f^("^/*i^ 1?/^; f lal^irf^ /^.PAW^./*\1 ?-lt &dfrAI ^TsssH^: ispri ussnrsin ^supis; Essmscs eounssE ror IH©sppsHSRi. -5-- ORALORDER (Passed on 28*" August, 2006) The following order of the Court was passed by C.J. In this appeai preferred by the insurance Company against the award passed by the MACT, the only contention urged by fhe iearned standing counsei is that though in the income tax return flied by the deceased, a sum of Rupees 70,6SO/- 'is shown to be ths income derivsd by the dsseassd by privats tuition and other sources, the MACT Is not justified in taking ths said sum for the purpose of eomputing the Joss of dependency. According to the iearned standing counss!, income derived by the decsased from tuition snd othsr sourcss wouid havs varisd from time to Sime and !t couid not be resardsd as assumed income from a reguiar sourcs. This was the only contention of the isarned standing counsei before us. The deceased died at the age of 32 vears, thst is io say, reiativeiy at a younger sge. it is not a cisim wiihout any basis. The deceased himseif disclosed his income dersved by him ivom tultion and other sources in the retum flled by him during the financlai year 2004-05 during which he died in the accident. We can take judicial notlce of the fact thaf generally speaking, such a man vrho could earn a sum of Rs.70,860/- frcm tuition and othsr sources during the year 2004-05, in course of time, fie wouid have sarned more incoms if hs wers to alive. Be that as ii may, the discretion exercised by the fact-fmding MACT cannot Jlghtly be interfsred with by the appejiata Court uniess a strong and welghty ground is mads out for such interference. Nothing is placed befors us io shov/ that what the decsased deciared in the income tax return as his income is fictitlous 'and wifhout basls. Lookind from anv •• -3- angle, no ground is made out for interferenee. The^ppea! is, thsrefore, dismissed. \ , / Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge