Kanwari Devi And Ors vs Umaida Ram And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2917 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1263/2007

1. Kanwari Devi W/o. Roopa Ram aged about 23 years,

2. Bhana Ram S/o. Roopa Ram

3. Pinku S/o. Roopa Ram

4. Kana Ram S/o. Roopa Ram

5. Smt. Teeja Devi W/o. Gayad Ram aged about 54 years, All B/c Nai, R/o. Village Budkiya, Tehsil Shergarh, District Jodhpur.

Appellants Nos. 2 to 4 are minors through their natural guardian and mother Smt. Kanwari Devi, appellant no.1.

----Appellants/Claimants Versus

1. Umaida Ram S/o. Sugna Ram B/c Lohar, R/o. Matoda Police Station Osian, District Jodhpur.

---Driver

2. Smt. Budhi Devi W/o. Anopa Ram B/c Jat R/o. Mahadev Colony, Chanana Bhakar, Jodhpur.

--- Owner

3. National Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office at Residency Road, Jodhpur.

                                                                  ---Insurer
                                        ----Respondents/Non-petitioners


For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Rajesh Panwar
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. S. R. Paliwal
                               Mr. Anil Bachhawat

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

03/02/2021

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the

matter is being heard and disposed of finally.

The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants for

enhancement of the amount awarded by the learned Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal(Additional District Judge, Fast Track

(2 of 4) [CMA-1263/2007]

No.4), Jodhpur vide award dated 14.11.2006 in Motor Accident

Claim Case No. 396/2005, whereby, an amount of Rs. 4,67,000/-

was awarded to the appellants-claimants.

Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submits that

arising out of the same accident two claim petitions were filed.

The same were adjudicated by the Tribunals at Jodhpur and

Phalodi. In the present case, the Tribunal directed the Driver

(Umaida Ram) and Owner (Smt. Budhi Devi) to pay the

compensation to the claimants. However, in the identical set of

facts, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Phalodi, District Jodhpur

in Motor Accident Claim Case No.51/2004 decided vide judgment

and award dated 28.11.2005 directed the Insurance Company to

pay the compensation and recover the same from the Driver and

Owner.

Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal committed

an error in this case, while not following the judgment and award

dated 28.11.2005 in Motor Accident Claim Case No.51/2004,

although, the same was placed on record as Exhibit A/3. Thus, he

submits that a direction may be given to the Insurance Company

to pay the compensation amount in the present case with liberty

to recover the same from the Driver and Owner with interest, if so

felt advised.

Secondly, the counsel for the appellants submits that the

computation of the award has not correctly been done, inasmuch

as no amount towards the future prospects has been awarded to

the claimants in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company

Limited V/s Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017) S.C.

5157.

(3 of 4) [CMA-1263/2007]

Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company fairly

submits that the contention raised by the learned counsel for the

appellants has merit as in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 51/2004

arising out of the same accident, the judgment passed by the

Tribunal dated 28.11.2005 has been complied with by the

Insurance Company and the amount has been disbursed to the

claimants. Thus, the parity is required to be maintained in this

case also.

As far as, the point of future prospects is concerned, learned

counsel submits that the amount of Rs.2,44,900/- (Rupees: Two

Lac Forty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Only) is required to be

paid in the present case in addition to the amount already

awarded by the Tribunal as an enhanced amount.

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar.

The contention of the appellants that the direction of the

Tribunal in fastening the liability to compensate the claimants in

the present case, on the driver and owner is not proper as in

Claim Case No. 51/2004, the Judge, Motor Accident Claim

Tribunal, Phalodi has already given a direction to the insurance

company to pay the compensation to the claimants and recover

the same from the driver and owner. Since, the judgment passed

in Claim Case No. 51/2004 was on record, then the parity should

have been maintained by the Tribunal in this case also. The fact

that the compensation in Claim Case No. 51/2004 has already

been paid by the insurance company, the finding recorded by the

Tribunal with respect to the payment of compensation to be made

by the driver and owner is set aside. Thus, it is ordered that the

insurance company shall pay the compensation to the claimants in

(4 of 4) [CMA-1263/2007]

this case also and recover the same from the driver and owner of

the subject vehicle, if so felt advised.

Since, no amount towards the future prospects has been

awarded in this case, the same is required to be computed in the

light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

Pranay Sethi(Supra).

The calculation done by the learned counsel for the

respondents for enhancement of amount in this case to the tune

of Rs.2,44,900/- (Rupees: Two Lac Forty Four Thousand Nine

Hundred Only) is agreed by the learned counsel for the appellants

which is directed to be paid along with the amount already

awarded by the learned Tribunal with interest @ 7.5% per

annum. Since, no amount has been disbursed in favour of the

claimants, the Insurance Company is directed to make payment of

entire amount within a period of six weeks from today.

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 159-SunilS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)