Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abdul Raseed vs Rambahadur Singh on 14 July, 2022
Author: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA
ON THE 14th OF JULY, 2022
MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 1031 of 2013
Between:-
1. ABDUL RASEED S/O MOHD. AYUB, AGED 48
YEAR S , R/O WARD NO.14 MIHONA POLICE
STATION MIHONA DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2 . FAEHMEEDA BEGUM W/O ABDUL RASEED,
AGED 45 YEARS, R/O WARD NO.14 MIHONA
POLICE STATION MIHONA DISTRICT BHIND
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI H.K. GOYAL - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAMBAHADUR SINGH S/O SHIVPRATAP SINGH,
AGED 41 YEARS R/O 69/10 SATYAM PARK
COLONY MUSA KHEDI CHOURAHA RING ROAD
DISTRICT INDORE HAL NIVASI E-2 HANUMAN
NAGAR GOLA KA MANDIR GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED EPIP RECO INDUSTRIAL AREA,
SITAPURA JAIPUR RAJASTHAN THROUGH
MANDAL PRABANDHAK.
3. MAHENDRA KUMAR S/O L.R. R/O BAGLE KA
BADA DAL BAZAR, LASHKAR, GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. PHOOL SINGH LODHI S/O BARELAL, AGED 28
YEARS, R/O GRAM NAGRELA POLICE STATION
PICHHORE, DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY
Signature Not Verified LIMITED THROUGHT MANAGER NEW
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
ADDRESS L.I.C. BUILDING, CITY CENTER,
Signing time: 14-07-2022 GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
05:43:20 PM
2
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI B.K. AGRAWAL - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2,
SHRI O.P. MATHUR - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.3 & 4
AND
SHRI ARVIND AGRAWAL - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.5)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed by the claimants under Section 173(1) of the
Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated 14.08.2013 passed by Additional
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lahar, District Bhind (M.P.), in motor
accident claim case No.6 of 2012. By impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has
awarded a total sum of Rs.3,33,000/- with interest to the claimants for the death
of one Mohsin Akram who died in vehicle accident. According to claimants, the
compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, needs to be enhanced. So
the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement
in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts / evidence adduced is made
out and if so, to what extent ?
It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the
accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is
liable for paying compensation etc. It is for the reason that firstly all these
findings are recorded in favour of claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of
these findings though recorded in claimants’ favour are under challenge at
the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance
company either by way of cross appeal or cross objection. In this view of the
matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all
Signature Notthese issues.
Verified
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
As observed supra, it is a death case. On 10/10/2011, deceased Mohsin
Signing time: 14-07-2022
05:43:20 PM
Akram, met with a motor accident and died while he was going to Bhind from
Gwalior by bus, giving rise to filing of claim petition by the claimaints, out of
which this appeal arises seeking compensation for his death. The case was
contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. The Claims Tribunal
by impugned award awarded a sum of Rs.3,33,000/- breakup of which is as
under :-
1. Loss of Dependency :- Rs.3,06,000/-
2. Funeral Expenses :- Rs.10,000/-
3. Loss of Estate :- Rs.5,000/-
4. Loss of Love & Affection :- Rs.10,000/-
5. Other Miscellaneous Expenses :- Rs.2,000/-
Total :- Rs.3,33,000/-
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the amount awarded by
the Tribunal is grossly inadequate as the future prospect has not been given by
the Tribunal. The incident is of the year 2011 and the age of deceased at the
time of incident was around 26 years and he was self-employed. Therefore,
learned counsel for the appellants only prayed to enhance the compensation
amount by adding 40% future prospect.
Learned counsel for the respondents have opposed the prayer made by
learned counsel for the appellants and submitted that the amount awarded by
the Tribunal is just and proper which requires no interference. It is further
prayed that the interest @ 8% per year be reduced to @ 6%.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record.
Signature Not VerifiedAs submitted by learned counsel for the parties that the compensation
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
amount has already been paid and this appeal is pending since year 2013,
Signing time: 14-07-2022
05:43:20 PM
therefore prayer for reduction of interest rate is hereby rejected. However, after
taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
is of the view that the appellants are entitle for total compensation of
Rs.4,55,400/- instead of Rs.3,33,000/- after adding 40% future prospect
(Rs.3,06,000 x 40% = Rs. 1,22,400/-).
Resultantly, appellants are held entitled to receive the enhanced amount of
Rs.1,22,400/- in addition to the amount of compensation already awarded by
the Claims Tribunal. Remaining part of award dated 14/08/2013 passed by
Claims Tribunal shall remain intact.
With the aforesaid modification the appeal stands disposed of. No order
as to costs.
(RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE
Shubhankar
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 14-07-2022
05:43:20 PM
