Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rambabu Jatav vs Salim Shah on 2 February, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
ON THE 2 nd OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. APPEAL No. 102 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. RAMBABU JATAV S/O SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
R/O WARD NO.15 SHANTIKUNJ COLONY,
BAIRASIYA BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. JYOTI JATAV W/O SHRI SANTOSH JATAV
D/O SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV, AGED ABOUT 34
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O H.NO. 385
VILLAGE SEVANIYA GOND BHADBHADA ROAD
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SMT. ARTI JATAV W/O SHRI KRISHNA JATAV R/O
SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O H.NO. 136 GAS
RAHAT KENDRA ANAND NAGAR BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SMT. MANJU JATAV W/O SHRI HEMRAJ JATAV
D/O SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV, AGED ABOUT 22
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O H.NO. 53
R/O VILLAGE HINGONI TEHSIL BAIRASIYA
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI SHIV KUMAR SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SALIM SHAH S/O SHRI HABIB SHAH, AGED
ABOUT 49 YEARS, WARD NO.09 BEHIND BUS
STAND AARON TEHSIL AARONI DISTRICT GUNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. WASIM SHAH S/O SHRI SALIM SHAH R/O C/O
AHMAD ALI, R/O HOUSE NO. 26 BELMOON
COLONY CHHOLA ROAD BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MONIKA
CHOURASIA
Signing time: 2/8/2024
2:03:36 PM
2
3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
DIVISIONAL OFFICE 1 SEVANI TOWER -71
MAHARANA PRATAP NAGAR ZONE-2 BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI GULAB CHAND SOHANE - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT
NO.3/INSURANCE COMPANY )
MISC. APPEAL No. 104 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. RAMBABU JATAV S/O SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
R/O WARD NO.15 SHANTIKUNJ COLONY,
BAIRASIYA BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. JYOTI JATAV W/O SHRI SANTOSH JATAV
D/O SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV, AGED ABOUT 34
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O H.NO. 385
VILLAGE SEVANIYA GOND BHADBHADA ROAD
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SMT. AARTI JATAV W/O SHRI KRISHNA JATAV
D/O SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV, AGED ABOUT 32
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O H.NO. 136
GAS RAHAT KENDRA ANAND NAGAR BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SMT. MANJU JATAV W/O SHRI HEMRAJ JATAV
D/O SHRI MUNNALAL JATAV, AGED ABOUT 22
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O H.NO. 53
VILLAGE HINGONI TEHSIL BAIRASIYA BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI SHIV KUMAR SHARMA - ADVOATE)
AND
1. SALIM SHAH S/O SHRI HABIB SHAH, AGED
ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O WARD NO.09 BEHIND BUS
STAND AARON TEHSIL AARONI DISTRICT GUNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. WASIM SHAH S/O SHRI SALIM SHAH R/O C/O
AHMAD ALI HOUSE NO. 26 BELMOON COLONY
CHHOLA ROAD BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MONIKA
CHOURASIA
Signing time: 2/8/2024
2:03:36 PM
3
3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
DIVISIONAL OFFICE 1 SEVANI TOWER 71
MAHARANA PRATAP NAGAR ZONE 2 (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI GULAB CHAND SOHANE - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT
NO.3/INSURANCE COMPANY)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
JUDGEMENT
Heard on IA No.446/2023 and 445/2023 the applications u/S 5 of
Limitaion Act for condonation of delay of 13 days and 12 days respectively
which are supported by the affidavits of Rambabu Jatav appellant himself.
2. After due consideration, aforesaid I.As. are allowed, delay is filing this
appeal is hereby condoned.
3. By this common judgment M.A.No.102/2023 and 104/2023 are being
disposed of simultaneously as they are arising out of the same accident
occurred on 30/8/2020 under the jurisdiction of Police Station Bairasiya Distt.
Bhopal.
4. This miscellaneous appeal filed by the appellants under Section 173 (1) of
the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 being aggrieved of award dated 13/9/2022 passed
by learned 25th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhopal in MACC
No.781/2021 and 782/2021.
5. The facts necessary for disposal of the present appeals in brief are that on
30/8/2020 at about 1:30 p.m., in the afternoon when Sushila Bai was going with
her husband Shri Munnalal Jatav on scooty towards Bairasiya to illage
Janakpur. All of a sudden, the respondent no.1, who is driver of the offending
Omni Van driven his vehicle in wrong side in rash and negligent manner and
dashed the scooty of the deceased. Due to the above accident, both husband
and wife died on the spot. Information given to the police. After completion of
investigation, the police filed charge sheet before the learned trial Court.
6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the learned tribunal
has assumed the income of the deceased as Rs.6896/- p.m. for 25 days in a
month while at the time of accident, it was Rs.8275/- p.m. and that income
ought to be taken for enhancement.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurance company submitted that an
appropriate award has already been passed by the learned tribunal in favour of
the appellants.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on careful perusal of
the record, it is found that the learned tribunal has taken income of the deceased
@ 25 days in a month, while it should be taken as 30 days in a month therefore
in MA No.102/2023, assuming the income Rs.8275/- p.m. if the assessment is
made then after deduction of personal expenses by 1/3rd and applying the
multiplier of 11, it comes to Rs.7,28,200/- adding filial consortium, funeral
charges and loss of estate the amount comes to Rs.9,37,200/- while the tribunal
has awarded only 7,09,649/-. Therefore, the difference amount comes to
Rs.2,27,551/- but since the appeal is filed for enhancement of Rs.2,00,000/-.
Therefore, the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- may be enhanced in favour of the
claimants/appellants. The calculation is not disputed by the learned counsel for
the parties.
9. In MA No.104/2023, assuming the income Rs.8275/- p.m. if the
assessment is made then after deduction of personal expenses by 1/3rd and
applying the multiplier of 7, it comes to Rs.4,63,400/- adding filial consortium,
funeral charges and loss of estate the amount comes to Rs.6,72,400/- while the
tribunal has awarded only 4,98,632/-. Therefore, the difference amount comes
to Rs.1,73,768/- the appeal is filed for enhancement of Rs.2,00,000/-.
Therefore, the amount of Rs.1,73,768/- may be enhanced in favour of the
claimants/appellants. The calculation is not disputed by the learned counsel for
the parties.
10. Therefore, the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to
the evidence on record the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (in MA No.102/2023) and
Rs.1,73,768/- (in MA No.104/2023) is hereby enhanced in favour of the
claimants/appellants in addition to the amount already awarded in favour of
them. Other terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact.
11. In the above terms, the appeals are allowed and disposed of. Record
be sent back.
12. A copy of this judgment be also kept in the record of MA no.102/2023
and 104/2023.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
m/-
