HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1463/2022
1. Jagdish Prasad Yadav S/o Shri Hanuman, Aged About 51
Years,
2. Smt. Bimla Devi W/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Yadav, Aged
About 49 Years,
Both R/o Naharwadi Tan Chapoli Tehsil Udaipurwati
District Jhunjhunu, Presently Residing At Prahad Yadav
S/o Shri Saiduram R/o Ghasi Ka Dehar Nangal Tehsil
Shrimadhopur, District Sikar (Raj.).
----Appellants/Claimants
Versus
1. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Through
Manager Divisional Office E-8, EPIP, RIICO Industrial Area
Sitapura Jaipur.
(Insurance Company Vehicle New Motorcycle Santro
Mahindra And Mahindra Company Chesis No.
MCDKG1B14F1G29253 Engine No. UPEFGO17215)
2. Gajendra Kumar S/o Shri Baluram, Aged About 26 Years,
R/o Kishanpura Police Station Ranoli District Sikar.
(Registered Owner Vehicle New Motorcycle Santro
Mahindra And Mahindra Company Chesis No.
MCDKG1B14F1G29253 Engine No. UPEFGO17215)
3. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Harphool Singh, R/o Kishanpura
Police Station Ranoli District Sikar.
(Vehicle Driver New Motorcycle Santro Mahindra And
Mahindra Company Chechis No. MCDKG1B14F1G29253
Engine No. UPEFO17215)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Akshat Choudhary, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA Judgment 08/07/2022 (Downloaded on 15/07/2022 at 08:57:36 PM) (2 of 3) [CMA-1463/2022] This Civil Misc. Appeal has been flied by the appellants- claimants (for short, 'the claimants') against the judgment dated 19.4.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shrimadhopur, District Sikar (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 13,38,081/- as compensation in their favour.
Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is abysmally low. He further submits that part amount has been awarded by the Tribunal in lieu of the medical bills. The amount awarded by the Tribunal under the head of consortium is also at lower side. Hence, the impugned judgment and award needs to be modified.
Heard. Considered.
As per the marks sheet of the deceased Amit Kumar, issued by Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, his date of birth was 4.12.1996 and the accident took place on 22.1.2016. In this way, as on the date of accident, he was about 20 years of age. Since no document was produced with regard to income of the deceased, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 6030/- per month (Rs. 201 X 30), whereas when specific amount of Rs. 5226/- per month was fixed by the State Government as minimum wages for unskilled labour, that should have been taken into consideration while assessing the income of the deceased. Thus, the income of the deceased is assessed at Rs. 5226/- per month instead of Rs. 6030/- per month, which comes to Rs. Rs. 62,712/- per annum (Rs. 5226 X 12).
In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Va. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, 40% of the income was (Downloaded on 15/07/2022 at 08:57:36 PM) (3 of 3) [CMA-1463/2022] added towards future prospects of the deceased. Thus the amount is calculated thus:
Rs. 62,712 + Rs. 25,085 = Rs. 87,797 Since the deceased was about 20 years of age at the time of accident, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 18 and deceased being a bachelor, rightly deduced 1/2 amount towards the personal expenses of the deceased and calculated the amount thus:
87,797 X 18 = Rs. 15,80,346/-
Rs. 15,80,364 X 1/2 = Rs. 7,90,173/-
In addition to the above and in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), the claimants would be entitled to receive Rs. 70,000/- towards conventional heads. The Tribunal has also awarded Rs. 3,70,345/- towards the expenses incurred on the treatment of the deceased, which includes the amount of medical bills. Thus, the amount receivable by the claimants is Rs. 12,30,518/-, whereas the Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 13,38,081/- as compensation.
For the aforesaid reasons, I find no force in this appeal and the same being bereft of any merit is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly.
(PRAKASH GUPTA),J DK/22 (Downloaded on 15/07/2022 at 08:57:36 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)