Rajasthan High Court
Rajasthan State Road Transport ... vs Vimla Devi W/O Late Ramphal on 21 January, 2021
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Cross Objection (Civil) No. 2/2021
1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Through
Chairman Rsrtc Chomu House, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur,
District Jaipur (Registered Owner Of Bus No. RJ-34-Pa-
0940)
2. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Through
Chief Manager, Hindaun Depot Rsrtc Depot, Hindaun,
District Karauli.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Vimla Devi W/o Late Ramphal, R/o Gohandi Meena, Tehsil
Mahwa, District Dausa.
2. Rinki D/o Ramphal, R/o Gohandi Meena, Presently Wife Of
Vinod, R/o Godla, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli.
3. Pinki D/o Ramphal, R/o Gohandi Meena, Presently W/o
Ramniwas, R/o Jhalatala, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District
Alwar.
4. Priya D/o Ramphal, R/o Gohandi Meena, Presently W/o
Naveen Meena, R/o Bawdikheda, Tehsil Mandawar, District
Dausa.
5. Aman Meena S/o Ramphal, R/o Gohandi Meena, Tehsil
Mahwa, District Dausa
6. Rajendra Gurjar S/o Brajmohan, R/o Rodkala, Tehsil And
District Karauli, (Driver Of Roadways Bus No. RJ-34-Pa-
0940)
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2884/2020
1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Through
Chairman Rsrtc Chomu House, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur,
District Jaipur (Registered Owner Of Bus No. RJ-34-Pa-
0940)
2. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Through
Chief Manager, Hindaun Depot Rsrtc Depot, Hindaun,
District Karauli.
----Petitioners
(2 of 4) [XOBJC-2/2021]
Versus
1. Smt. Vimla Devi W/o Late Ramphal, Aged About 50 Years,
R/o Gohandi Meena, Tehsil Mahwa, District Dausa.
2. Rinki D/o Ramphal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gohandi
Meena, Presently Wife Of Vinod, R/o Godla, Tehsil
Todabhim, District Karauli.
3. Pinki D/o Ramphal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Gohandi
Meena, Presently W/o Ramniwas, R/o Jhalatala, Tehsil
Laxmangarh, District Alwar.
4. Priya D/o Ramphal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Gohandi
Meena, Presently W/o Naveen Meena, R/o Bawdikheda,
Tehsil Mandawar, District Dausa.
5. Aman Meena S/o Ramphal, Aged About 21 Years, R/o
Gohandi Meena, Tehsil Mahwa, District Dausa.
6. Rajendra Gurjar S/o Brajmohan, R/o Rodkala, Tehsil And
District Karauli, (Driver Of Roadways Bus No. RJ-34-Pa-
0940)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rizwan Ahmed,
Mr. Virendra Agrawal with
Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jiya Ur Rahman
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
21/01/2021
This appeal and the cross objection are directed against the
determination of amount of compensation by the learned District
Judge, Dausa, District Dausa, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Dausa) vide its judgment dated 15.09.2020 whereby, the
claimants have been held entitled for total compensation of
Rs.12,40,000/- on account of death of Ramphal aged 49 years
employed as Security Guard with a private firm.
(3 of 4) [XOBJC-2/2021]
Assailing the quantum, learned counsel for the appellant
contended that learned Tribunal erred in assessing the
compensation against the material on record which is required to
be reduced appropriately; whereas, the learned counsel appearing
for the respondents-claimants sought for enhancement of the
compensation.
Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the
record.
Both the learned counsels for the respective parties are
unanimous that compensation payable has to be assessed as per
the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors.
(2017) 16 SCC 680. Accordingly, this Court examines validity of
the judgment dated 15.09.2020 on the parameters laid down in
the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court.
The learned Tribunal has assessed the monthly salary of the
deceased as Rs.9,000/- as per the salary certificate (Exhibit-1)
which has duly been proved by Shri Kamlesh Kumar (AW-3),
proprietor of M/s. Amandeep Motors, the employer of the
deceased. Learned Tribunal has increased the salary by 25%
keeping in view the future prospects of the enhancement in it
which is found to be proper in view of the age of the deceased.
Similarly, multiplier of 13 has been used which is found
appropriate; age of the deceased being 49 years. Looking to the
number of dependents on the deceased, the learned Tribunal did
not err in deducting 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards
personal expenses. Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.70,000/- under the conventional heads. Thus, the
compensation payable to the claimants has been assessed by the
(4 of 4) [XOBJC-2/2021]
learned Tribunal in accordance with the guidelines laid by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance Company
Ltd. (Supra). The judgment impugned does not suffers from any
perversity or illegality. Both the learned counsels for the
respective parties failed to point out any such illegality or
perversity in the judgment impugned dated 15.09.2020 which
may require interference by this Court under its appellate
jurisdiction.
Resultantly, the miscellaneous appeal and the cross objection
are dismissed devoid of merit.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
DANISH USMANI /79 & 80
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
