Jammu and Kashmir High Court Reiterated that Interest Cannot be Awarded on the Loss of Future Income

Must Read

Doctrine of Proportionality Must Adhere to Reasonableness Principal Test: Madras High Court

Young Men's Christian Association built a commercial complex and leased it without having due permission. The District Collector &...

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Release of ‘The White Tiger’ on the OTT Platform Netflix

A plea requesting a stay on the release of the film ‘The White Tiger’ by the American producer, John Hart Jr. alleging copyright violation was rejected by the Delhi High Court on Thursday.

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court,...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first...

Follow us

On 30 June 2020, Hon’ble Justice Sanjay Dhar heard the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Bilal Ahmad Mir and others, via video-conferencing. The Court upheld the Tribunal’s award of compensation but modified the aspect of interest.

Facts of the Case

On 14 July 2004, the claimant traveled in a vehicle from Srinagar to Tral. The said vehicle met with an accident, resulting in him to suffer serious injuries. The injuries led to the amputation of his right arm. He sought a compensation of Rs 29 lakhs from the owner, driver, and the insurer of the offending vehicle. However, the insurance company contended that there was a breach of a policy condition.

The Tribunal held that there was no such breach. It also awarded a compensation of Rs 15,10,000/- to the injured. It directed the insurance company to pay the said amount with 6% interest. The Tribunal added failure of the same would lead to a payment of 9%penal interest. Aggrieved by this Award, the Insurance Company filed an instant appeal in this Court.

Arguments of the Appellant

The appellant company argued that the offending vehicle’s driver booked under Section 3 and Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act. This shows that he was not carrying a valid driving license when the accident occurred. Despite that, the Tribunal concluded that there was no policy condition breach. The company contended that the amount of compensation awarded is exorbitant, excessive, and unjust.

The claimant did not prosecute the matter before the Tribunal for two years. Even then, the Tribunal awarded the interest for this period in favor of the claimant. Thus, the Tribunal is neither liable to pay the penal interest nor the interest in the loss of future income. The functional disability of the injured is not 100%. Thus, Tribunal was not justified in computing the compensation based on the same. It is also not necessary to award future attendant charges.

Arguments of the Respondent

The claimant-respondent argued that the company did not prove that the offending driver did not hold a valid driving license when the accident occurred. Thus, the Tribunal’s award of compensation is reasonable.

Court’s Analysis

The copy of the driving license is not on record of the Tribunal. The burden of proof of breach of policy conditions is on the insurer-company. In this case, the company did not produce any evidence about policy condition breach. The company has missed the opportunity to do so.

Hence, the Tribunal’s conclusion that there was no breach of policy the condition cannot interfere with. The appellant argued that Tribunal was not justified in computing the compensation. The doctors’ statement shows that the claimant needs an attendant throughout his life. He cannot even perform his daily chores as he lost his working limb. Thus, the Tribunal is justified in awarding future attendant charges. It is settled law that no interest can be awarded in respect of future income. The Tribunal is not competent to award penal interest on the awarded sum.

Thus, the Tribunal was not justified in either awarding interest on the loss of future income or in awarding the interest of 9% per annum in case of default.

Court’s Decision

The Court upheld the Tribunal’s award of compensation. However, the impugned order stands modified. The awarded sum under the head ‘loss of future income’ will not carry any interest. The direction about payment of penal interest of 9% is also set aside. In view of the same, the Court disposed of the appeal.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Doctrine of Proportionality Must Adhere to Reasonableness Principal Test: Madras High Court

Young Men's Christian Association built a commercial complex and leased it without having due permission. The District Collector & Tahsildar issued a show-cause notice...

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Release of ‘The White Tiger’ on the OTT Platform Netflix

A plea requesting a stay on the release of the film ‘The White Tiger’ by the American producer, John Hart Jr. alleging copyright violation was rejected by the Delhi High Court on Thursday.

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being imposed.  Brief facts of the case This...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.  Brief facts of the...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Bhuj in the case of...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first consignment, on 10.06.2020 and the,...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms (Dharanidhar Karimojji vs UOI). Brief Facts: The...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was to be enhanced or not.   Brief...

Delhi HC to Municipal Corp: Paucity of Funds Not an Excuse for Non-Payment of Salaries and Pensions

The Delhi High Court ruled that the paucity of funds cannot be an excuse and pulled up municipal corporations for not paying salaries and pensions to their employees as the right to receive payment is a fundamental right guaranteed in our constitution.

US Supreme Court Reinstates Restriction on Abortion Pills

The Supreme Court of the United States granted the Trump administration’s request to reinstate federal rules requiring women to make in-person visits to hospitals...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -