Smt Kripa Devi And Ors vs Laxman Singh And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 310 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3001/2018

1.      Smt. Kripa Devi W/o Late Ominath Yogi, age 38 years

2.      Kumari Rajo Devi W/o Late Phoolanath Yogi, age 70 years.

3.      Urma Devi D/o Shri Ominath Yogi, age 20 years.

4.      Anju D/o Late Ominath Yogi, age 12 years.

5.      Brijesh S/o Late Ominath Yogi. Age 7 years.

6.      Ankit S/o Late Ominath Yogi, age 5 years
        Appellant Nos. 4 To 6 Are Minor Through Their Natural
        Guardian And Mother Smt. Kripa Devi W/o Late Ominath
        Yogi All R/o Dhani Maida Wali Tan Bhabru, Thana Shahpura,
        District Jaipur Raj

                                                        ----Claimants-Appellants

                                      Versus

1.      Laxman Singh S/o Dhara Singh Jat R/o Gomet, Police Thana
        Raver, District Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh (Driver)

2.      Azad Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh Swami, R/o Khandsa,
        Tarawadi, Gurgaon Haryana (Owner)

3.      Chola Mandal General Insurance Company Limited Through
        Regional Manager, Ganga Heights, Seventh Floor, Main Tonk
        Road, Sb-154, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur (Insurance Company)

                                                 ----Non Claimant-Respondent

For Appellant(s)           :     Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. C.S. Jodha


       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
                          Order

15/01/2021

This appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants

against the award dated 17.03.2018 passed by the learned Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Shahpura, District Jaipur (for brevity

"learned Tribunal") whereby, allowing the claim petition in part, an

award of Rs. 7,32,930/-, has been passed in favour of the

appellants.

(2 of 3) [CMA-3001/2018]

Assailing the findings of the learned Tribunal qua Issue No.3,

learned counsel for the appellants contended that the learned

Tribunal has erred in assessing the monthly income of the deceased

as Rs.3510/- i.e. the minimum wages payable to unskilled labour

ignoring that the deceased was skilled labour.

Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court of India in

case of Laxmidhar Nayak & Ors. Vs. Jugal Kishore Behera &

Ors., 2018 (1) ACTC (SC) 5, he contended that the minimum

income of Rs. 4500/- per month should have been assessed by the

learned Tribunal for arriving at just and reasonable compensation.

Learned counsel referred the judgment of this Court in case of

Jalaur Singh @ Dilawar Singh & Anr. Vs. Barkat & Ors.

decided on 26.03.2012 in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.

6562/2011 to contend that the learned Tribunal should have

assessed the monthly income of the deceased taking into

consideration the working days as 30 instead of 26. He contended

that in the aforesaid circumstances, the compensation be suitably

enhanced.

Opposing the prayer, it is contended by learned counsel for

the respondent No.3 that the learned Tribunal has assessed just

and fair compensation payable to the claimant on the basis of

material on record which does not require any interference by this

Court in its appellate jurisdiction.

Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the

record.

The appellants did not produce any evidence to show that the

deceased was skilled labour. Smt. Kripa Devi-AW-1, wife of the

deceased has categorically admitted during course of her cross-

examination that no documentary evidence as to income or

(3 of 3) [CMA-3001/2018]

occupation of the deceased has been produced on record. As per

the Minimum Wages Act, the minimum wages payable to an

unskilled labour at the relevant time was Rs. 3510/- per month and

the learned Tribunal has committed no error in taking the same to

be monthly income of the deceased. The reliance placed by the

learned counsel for the appellants on the judgment of Laxmidhar

Nayak (supra) is misconceived in as much as therein it was

established from the evidence on record that the deceased was

agricultural labour and the Tribunal has assessed her income @

Rs.25/- per day without even taking into consideration the future

prospects; whereas, in the present case, monthly income of the

deceased has been assessed as per the minimum wages fixed by

the competent authority and suitable compensation has also been

awarded keeping in view the future prospects of the enhancement

in monthly income of the deceased.

In these circumstances, the judgment rendered by the

Hon'ble Apex Court of India in case of Laxmidhar Nayak (supra)

is of no help to the appellants. Similarly, the judgment of this Court

in case of Jalaur Singh @ Dilawar Singh (supra) is of no

assistance in as much as therein the monthly income of the

deceased was assessed taking the minimum wages of per day

multiplied by 26 days; whereas, in the present case, the minimum

wages fixed for a month has been taken to be the monthly income

of the deceased.

In the aforesaid circumstances this Court finds no illegality in

the award passed by the learned Tribunal.

Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed being devoid of merit.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

Sudha/82

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)