[2023:RJ-JP:26899]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1939/2009
1. Smt Koyali Devi W/o Late Jaswant @ Jai Singh aged about 28
years
2. Kumari Pushpa D/o Late Jaswant @ Jai Singh, aged about 9
years, minor through her mother - appellant No.1.
3. Master Dilip S/o Late Jaswant @ Jai Singh, aged about 3.5
years, minor through his mother - appellant No.1
All R/o Village Umar Bawadi, Tehsil Bheem, presently residing at
Ganeshpura, Tehsil Beawar.
----Claimants/Appellant
Versus
1. Ram Chandra S/o Jagdish Prasad Sahu Kanwasi Teliyon Ka
Mohalla, Bichadali Mohalla, Beawar. (Driver and owner of the
Mini Bus No.RNZ-7313).
2. United India Insurance Company Ltd., through its Regional
Manager, Regional Office at Sahara Chambers, Tonk Road, Jaipur.
3. Kheem Singh S/o Ratan Singh, aged about 61 years, R/o
Village Umar Bawadi, Tehsil Bheem, presently residing at
Ganeshpura, Tehsil Bewar.
4. Smt. Ganga Devi W/o Kheem Singh, aged about 57 years, R/o
Village Umar Bawadi, Tehsil Bheem, presently residing at
Ganeshpura, Tehsil Beawar.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sanjay Singhal for Mr. J. P. Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raj Pal Choudhary HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 03/10/2023
1. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants - claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 13.05.2005 passed by (Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:28:28 PM) [2023:RJ-JP:26899] (2 of 6) [CMA-1939/2009] Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar, District Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in MAC Case No.94/2002, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,51,000/- to the appellants-claimants (hereinafter referred to as the 'claimants').
2. The claimants submitted a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.25,32,000/-. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the issues and evaluated the evidence on record. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition of the claimants and passed the impugned judgment and award. Hence, the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the claimants contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in passing the impugned judgment in awarding the amount of compensation on a lower side. Learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased only Rs.2500/- per month, whereas the deceased was a driver and used to earn Rs.4000/- per month.
4. Learned counsel further contended that the learned Tribunal has also erred in not awarding future prospects, as the deceased was 32 years of age at time of accident and he was self employed and, therefore, the claimants are entitled for 40% future prospects.
5. Learned counsel argued that learned Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3rd from the income of the deceased, as the appellant Nos.1 to 5 are dependent upon deceased - Jaswant and, (Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:28:28 PM) [2023:RJ-JP:26899] (3 of 6) [CMA-1939/2009] therefore, 1/5th ought to be deducted from the income of the deceased.
6. Learned counsel further contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in awarding interest @ 7% per annum. It is settled law that interest on the compensation amount ought to have been awarded at least @ 12% per annum.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance Company has supported the impugned judgment and award and contended that there is no merit in this appeal and the same be dismissed.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
9. Learned Tribunal in the impugned judgment has observed that no evidence was produced to prove that the deceased, by doing the work of driver used to earn Rs.4000/- per month at the time of accident. Therefore, learned Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2500/-.
10. In the opinion of this Court, the income of the deceased, as alleged in the claim petition was not proved by the claimants. As per the claimants, profession of the deceased at the time of accident, was driving. The learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.2500/- and the same has not been rebutted thus, in my considered opinion the monthly income of the deceased as calculated by the learned Tribunal requires no interference.
(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:28:28 PM) [2023:RJ-JP:26899] (4 of 6) [CMA-1939/2009]
11. The learned Tribunal has not added any amount to the income so determined by it under the head of future prospects. The deceased has been held to be 32 years of age. Therefore, increment of 40% as to the future prospects, as per the direction given in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 is also to be made. Thus, total monthly income of the deceased comes out to be Rs.2500 + 40% (Rs.1000/-) future prospects = Rs.3500/- per month.
12. It is an admitted fact that the deceased is survived by his wife, two children and mother. Therefore, 1/4th part from the income of the deceased is to be deducted under the head of personal expenses. The net income of the deceased comes out to be Rs.3500 divided by 4 = Rs.875 and total Rs.3500 - Rs.875 = Rs.2625/- per month.
13. The age of the deceased was 32 years at the time of accident thus, as per judgment of Pranay Sethi (supra) the multiplier of 17 is applicable in this case. Now, applying the multiplier of 17, total amount quantified as the net income of the deceased comes out to be Rs.2625 x 12 x 17 = Rs.5,35,500/-.
14. Learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the wife of deceased and Rs.4000/- to the children and mother of the deceased under the head of consortium. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satvinder Kaur & Anr. reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780 and (Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:28:28 PM) [2023:RJ-JP:26899] (5 of 6) [CMA-1939/2009] Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, the claimant- appellant-wife of the deceased is entitled to get Rs.40,000/- under the head of spousal consortium, appellant Nos.2 & 3, who are children of the deceased, are entitled to get Rs.40,000/- each under the head of parental consortium.
15. Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- for funeral expenses, which needs to be enhanced to Rs.15,000/-. Further, Rs.15,000/- is also required to be granted under the head of loss of estate.
16. So, judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent as under:
1. Loss of Annual Income (as Rs.2625 x 12 x 17 =
per the age of the Rs.5,35,500/-.
deceased, multiplier of 17).
2. Under the head of Spousal Rs.40,000/- each to the
Consortium and Parental appellants
Consortium Total Rs.1,20,000/-
3. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
4. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
5. Total amount of Rs.6,85,500/-
compensation
6. Less amount awarded by Rs.3,51,000/-
the Tribunal
7. Enhanced amount of (Rs.6,85,500-
compensation Rs.3,51,000=
Rs.3,34,500/-
19. In view of the above, the impugned judgment and award dated 13.05.2005 passed by the Tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. The appellants are entitled to get a sum of Rs.6,85,500/- as compensation. Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced amount of compensation with the Tribunal (Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:28:28 PM) [2023:RJ-JP:26899] (6 of 6) [CMA-1939/2009] within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. After deposition of the said amount, the learned Tribunal is directed to disburse the same to the appellants in terms of the award. The enhanced amount shall carry 8% interest from the date of filing of claim petition till the actual payment is made.
20. The other terms and conditions of the impugned judgment and award shall remain the same.
21. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed.
22. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J A. ARORA /-07.
(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:28:28 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)