Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pritam Singh Rajput vs Santosh Tirki on 6 October, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 6 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
MISC. APPEAL No. 2373 of 2017
BETWEEN:-
1. PRITAM SINGH RAJPUT S/O SHRI SARDAR SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. VILL. BERKHEDI,
TAH. DEORI DISTT. SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT MAANKUNWAR BAI W/O PRITAM SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, VILLAGE BERKHEDI
TAHSIL DEORI (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SSMT RASHMI RAJPUT W/O LATE RAM GOPAL
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, VILLAGE
BERKHEDI TAHSIL DEORI (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. RAJ PRATAP SINGH S/O LATE RAM GOPAL SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR
THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT
RASHMI RAJPUT VILLAGE BERKHEDI TAHSIL
DEORI (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SURYA PRATAP SINGH S/O LATE RAM GOPAL
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, VILLAGE
BERKHEDI TAHSIL DEORI (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. SADHNA RAJPUT D/O PRITAM SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 22 YEARS, VILLAGE BERKHEDI TAHSIL
DEORI (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. SMT SHIV KUMARI W/O SONU TOMAR, AGED
ABOUT 26 YEARS, GWALTOLI HOSHANGABAD
TAHSIL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI PRIYANK KHANDELWAL - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SANTOSH TIRKI S/O BAARAMDEV TIRKI DRIVER
R/O. PRAKASH MODERN SCHOOL, ANAN NAGAR
BHOPAL, TAH. AND DISTT. BHOPAL M.P.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHWANI
PRAJAPATI
Signing time: 10-10-2023
09:57:53
2
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. UJJWAL TRADERS S4 NIKHIL HOMES PHASE 4
NEAR PRABHAT PETROL PUMP GOVINDPURA
TAHSIL BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. BRANCH MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
CO LTD 1ST FLOOR VAKRATUND SHOPPING
COMPLEX IN FRONT OF MPSRTC BUS STAND
TAHSIL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI N.S. RUPRAH - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 -
INSURANCE COMPANY)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal is filed by appellants under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, being aggrieved of award dated 04.09.2017, passed by
learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshangabad (M.P.), in Claim Case
No.116/2015, on two grounds, namely, Tribunal has passed award only against
owner-driver of the offending vehicle exonerating the Insurance Company.
2. It is submitted that even in absence of production of driving license an
award should have been that of pay and recover. It is submitted that now
driving license of the driver Santosh Tirki S/o Varamdeo Tirki has been
produced and it has been verified by the Insurance Company that on the date of
the accident i.e. 06.04.2015, driver was having valid driving license, therefore,
liability should have been fastened jointly and severally on the owner, driver and
insurer.
3. It is submitted that Tribunal in a cryptic manner without there being any
evidence has recorded finding of contributory negligence which too needs to be
set aside. Reading exhaustively, it is submitted that error apparent on the face
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHWANI
PRAJAPATI
Signing time: 10-10-2023
09:57:53
of record in recording a finding of contributory negligence is without there
being any material on record.
4. Shri N.S. Ruprah, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, submits
that there are two errors apparent on face of record, namely, age of the
deceased has come on record as 32 years, yet Tribunal without reading and
understanding the impart of judgment rendered by Supreme Court in Sarla
Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another [(2009) 6
SCC 121], has applied multiplier of 17, whereas, it should have been 16.
Similarly, 1/4th deduction has been made, whereas, 1/3rd deduction should have
been made because actual dependents on the deceased are his wife and two
children.
5. Shri Ruprah, does not dispute verification of the driving license of Santosh
Tirki.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record,
since driving license has been produced which was valid on the date of the
accident, exoneration of the Insurance Company is set aside.
7. As far as compensation is concerned, Tribunal has considered income of
the deceased at Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs) and then added
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) from the agriculture income taking into
consideration a fact hat there was 2.5 acres of land in the name of deceased
Ramgopal. However, this addition of agriculture income is not called for.
When income of the deceased is taken at Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs)
and 1/4th is deducted towards the living expenses of the deceased, then it
comes out to Rs.2,25,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs and Twenty Five Thousand).
Looking to the age of deceased, 40% is to be added towards future prospects
and then multiplier of 16 is applied, then pecuniary compensation comes out to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHWANI
PRAJAPATI
Signing time: 10-10-2023
09:57:53
Rs.50,40,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lacs and Forty Thousand) in place of
Rs.51,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty One Lacs) awarded by learned Claims Tribunal.
8. Thus, there will be reduction to the tune of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty
Thousand). As far as interest is concerned, that will be payable by the owner-
driver of the offending vehicle, inasmuch as, they did not produce the driving
license in time and for that interest liability cannot be fastened on the Insurance
Company. After reduction, remaining amount of award will earn interest @ 6%
per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till the date of actual
payment and the same will remain invested in a monthly Scheme of an Indian
Post Office/ Nationalised Bank in the joint name of the claimants for a period of
20 years. Other terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact.
9. In above terms, appeal is disposed of.
10. Let record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
A.Praj.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHWANI
PRAJAPATI
Signing time: 10-10-2023
09:57:53
