Rajasthan High Court
A V V N L And Ors vs Smt Kamla Devi And Ors on 5 April, 2024
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
[2024:RJ-JP:16030]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 915/2018
1. Kamla Devi W/o Late Mahipal, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Bas Nanag, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
2. Poonam D/o Late Mahipal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Bas
Nanag, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
3. Paramraj S/o Late Mahipal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Bas
Nanag, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
4. Anurag S/o Late Mahipal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Bas
Nanag, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
----Appellants
Versus
1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Through Its Managing
Director, City Power House, Hathi Bhata Sadak, Ajmer.
2. Superintending Engineer, Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam
Limited, Jhunjhunu.
3. Executive Engineer, Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
Jhunjhunu.
4. Assistant Engineer (Rural), Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam
Limited, Badagaon, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District
Jhunjhunu.
5. Junior Engineer (Rural), Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam
Limited, Binjusar, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu.
----Respondents
Connected With S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 935/2017
1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer Through, Managing Director, City Power House Hathi Bhata Sadak, Ajmer Rajasthan
2. Superintendent Engineer, Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Jhunjhunu Rajasthan
3. Executive Engineer, Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Rajasthan
4. Assistant Engineer Rural, Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Bada Gaon, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan (Downloaded on 19/04/2024 at 09:07:33 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:16030] (2 of 6) [CFA-915/2018]
5. Junior Engineer Rural Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam, Ltd., Binjusar, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan
----Appellants Versus
1. Smt. Kamla Devi W/o Late Mahipal R/o Bas Nanag, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan
2. Kumari Poonam, D/o Late Mahipal, R/o Bas Nanag, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan
3. Paramraj, S/o Alte Mahipal , R/o Bas Nanag , Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan
4. Anurag S/o Late Mahipalt, R/o Bas Nanag, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan
----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vinay Mathur for Insurance Company For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhawani Shanker for Mr. Parinitoo Jain for Claimants HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment DATE OF JUDGMENT 05/04/2024 The instant appeals have arisen out of the judgment and decree dated 22.08.2017 passed by the District Judge, Jhunjhunu (for short 'the trial Court') in civil suit No. 08/2016 (CIS No. 3/2015) titled as "Smt Kamla Devi and Ors. Vs. Ajmer Vidhut Vitran Nigam Limited and Ors.", whereby the trial Court while partly allowing the civil suit, has decreed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the suit as compensation in favour of the appellants-plaintiffs (for short 'the plaintiffs').
CFA No.915/2018 has been filed by the plaintiffs seeking enhancement the amount of compensation, as awardedby the trial (Downloaded on 19/04/2024 at 09:07:33 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:16030] (3 of 6) [CFA-915/2018] Court, whereas CFA No.935/2017 has been filed by the Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (for short 'the AVVNL') challenging the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court on the various grounds.
SB CFA No. 915/2018- Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the trial Court erred in considering the income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that while calculating the compensation amount, the trial Court has decreed a lump sum amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- only. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that income of the deceased was to be calculated on the basis of minimum wages prevalent at the relevant point of time i.e. Rs.189/- per day. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that the trial Court has not awarded any amount towards future prospects, whereas as per age of the deceased i.e. 44 years, plaintiffs are entitled to get 25% of the deceased's income towards future prospects. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that the trial Court wrongly deducted 1/3rd from the income of the deceased as his personal expenses. As per the dependency of the deceased, deduction towards the personal expenses should be 1/4th. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that the trial Court has decreed very meagre amount towards loss of consortium and love and affection, whereas it should be Rs.40,000/- for each plaintiff. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs also submits that trial Court has not awarded any amount under the head of loss of estate, whereas it should be Rs. 15,000/-. So, judgment and decree of the trial Court be modified accordingly.
(Downloaded on 19/04/2024 at 09:07:33 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:16030] (4 of 6) [CFA-915/2018] Learned counsel for the AVVNL in CFA No.935/2017 has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiffs and submitted that the trial Court has wrongly held AVVNL liable to pay the amount of compensation to the plaintiffs. Learned counsel for the AVVNL submits that the deceased himself was involved in the electricity theft and due to electrocution, he died. Learned counsel for the AVVNL further submits that trial Court wrongly considered the income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month and wrongly applied the multiplier of 15, whereas as per the age of deceased i.e. 44 years, multiplier of 14 should be applied. Learned counsel for the AVVNL further submits that the trial Court has wrongly awarded Rs, 20,000/- towards funeral expenses, whereas it should be Rs.15,000/-. So, judgment and decree of the trial Court be modified/set-aside accordingly.
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiffs as well as learned counsel for the AVVNL.
It is an admitted position that the trial Court while calculating the income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month, decreed the lump sum amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- only as per the policy of the State Government but the said policy was not exhibited during the trial. So, in my considered opinion, income of the deceased is to be calculated on the basis of minimum wages prevalent at the relevant point of time i.e. Rs.189/- per day. The trial Court wrongly applied the multiplier of 15, whereas it should be 14 on the basis of age of the deceased. The trial Court wrongly deducted 1/3rd amount towards the personal expenses of the deceased. Since the deceased had four dependents, 1/4th amount should be deducted from the deceased's income. The trial Court (Downloaded on 19/04/2024 at 09:07:34 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:16030] (5 of 6) [CFA-915/2018] has not awarded any amount towards future prospects. So, in my considered opinion, plaintiffs are entitled to get 25% towards the future prospects. The trial Court has awarded lump sum amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of consortium and love and affection, whereas it should be Rs.40,000/- for each plaintiff. The trial Court has wrongly awarded Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses, whereas it should be Rs.15,000/-. The trial Court has not awarded any amount towards loss of estate, whereas it should be Rs.15,000/-. So, judgment and decree of the trial court is modified to the extent as under:
Monthly Income 189X30=Rs. 5,670/-
Annual Income 5670X12= Rs.68,040/-
1/4 income to be deducted for 68,040-17,010= Rs.51,030/-
personal expenses of the
deceased(-)
According to the age of the 51,030 X 14=Rs. Rs.7,14,420/-
deceased i.e. 44 years,
multiplier of 14 should be
applied
Add 25% towards future Rs.7,14,420 /- + Rs.1,78,605/-
prospects (+) =Rs.8,93,025/-
Loss of Consortium to plaintiff Rs.1,60,000/-
No.1 (Rs.40,000/-) & loss of
Love & Affection to plaintiff
Nos.2 to 4 (Rs.40,000X3) (+)
Funeral expenses(+)
Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of Estate(+)
Rs. 15,000/-
Total
Rs. 10,83,025/-
Awarded amount
Rs. 5,00,000/-
Enhanced Amount
Rs. 10,83,025-Rs. 5,00,000= Rs.
5,83,025/-
(Downloaded on 19/04/2024 at 09:07:34 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:16030] (6 of 6) [CFA-915/2018]
The plaintiffs are entitled to get a further sum of Rs.5,83,025/-(10,83,025-5,00,000) as compensation. The AVVNL is directed to deposit enhanced amount of Rs. 5,83,025/- with the trail Court within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. On deposition of the said amount, the plaintiffs shall be entitled to withdrawn the same. The enhanced amount shall carry @ 9% interest per annum from the date of filing the civil suit till the actual payment is made.
In the result, appeal filed by the AVVNL as well as the appeal filed by the plaintiffs are partly allowed, as indicated above.
Rest part of the impugned judgment shall remain unchanged. Impugned judgment and decree is modified accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Tahir/290-291 (Downloaded on 19/04/2024 at 09:07:34 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)