Smt. Nirmala And Ors vs Anwar Ali And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 6660 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1472/2005

1. Smt. Nirmala W/o Shri Purshottam Das, aged 45 years.

2. Ms Jyoti D/o Shri Purshottam Das, aged 28 years.

3. Kamal Joshi S/o Shri Purshottam Das, aged 26 years.

4. Ms Gunjan D/o Shri Purshottam Das, aged 21 years.

5. Ms Leena D/o Shri Purshottam Das, aged 19 years.

6. Smt. Manjulata W/o Shri Babu Lal, aged 77 years.

All by caste Joshi, residents of Joshiyonka Bas, Barmer.

----Appellants-claimants Versus

1. Anwar Ali S/o Shri Nathu Khan, B/c Mohamadan, resident of Hasampur District Sikar.

(owner)

2. Madan Lal S/o Shri Ridmal, by caste Dhanak, R/o 22/3 Gandhi- Nagar, Sonipath (Haryana) (Driver)

3. Regional Manager, United India Insurance company Ltd. Sahara Chambers, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

(Insurer)

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anil Bhandari.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jagdish Vyas.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

05/03/2021

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the

present appeal is being finally heard and decided today itself.

The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment

and award dated 06.07.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Barmer in Motor Accident Claim Case No.132/1998

whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.4,23,520/- as

(2 of 4) [CMA-1472/2005]

compensation in favour of the appellants- claimants with an

interest @ 6% p.a. on account of the death of Purshottam Das in

the accident which occurred on 22.06.1998.

Learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the

evidence available on record and hearing learned counsel for the

parties allowed the claim petition of the appellants vide its

judgment and award dated 06.07.2005 and awarded

compensation to the appellants-claimants as stated above.

The counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal

committed an error in calculating the compensation in the present

case and awarded a meagre sum of Rs.4,23,520/- in favour of the

appellants, therefore, the same is required to be enhanced

suitably. The counsel further submits that the amount of

compensation may be recomputed in the light of judgment of

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance

Company v. Pranay Sethi (2017) SC 5157. Learned counsel

further submits that the Tribunal erred while deducting an amount

of Rs.4000/- paid to the family members towards family pension

from the total income computed in this case.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Insurance

Company submits that the Tribunal rightly awarded compensation

in the present case after adducing the evidence brought on record

and a just compensation has been awarded by the Tribunal vide its

judgment and award dated 06.07.2005, therefore, the same

needs no interference by this Hon'ble Court. However, learned

counsel for the respondent Insurance Company is not in a position

to controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the

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

(3 of 4) [CMA-1472/2005]

in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. V/s Pranay Sethi

(supra).

I have considered the submissions made at the bar, gone

through the judgment and award dated 06.07.2005 and relevant

record of the case.

While deciding the issue No.1, the factum of accident is

proved in this case. No dispute has been raised with respect to the

death of Purshottam Das in the accident which occurred on

22.06.1998. The deceased was a government servant, therefore,

his income is also not disputed. However, the Tribunal has

committed error in deducting an amount of Rs.4000/- paid to the

family members of the deceased as family pension while

calculating the amount of income in this case. The same,

therefore, is required to be set aside. The complete monthly

income of the deceased is assessed to be Rs.10004/-in total and

the same is required to be taken into consideration while

calculating the income of the deceased. It is observed that there

are six family members and therefore, deduction of amount to the

extent of 1/4 of the income is only required to be made instead of

1/3 deduction of income as ordered by the Tribunal. Learned

counsel for the parties have submitted a joint calculation in the

present case, the same reads as under:-

     Date of accident            :       22.06.1998

     Name of deceased            :       Purshottam Das

     Age of the Injured          :       48 Years

     Monthly income              :       Rs.10004/-
     Annual income               :       Rs.1,20,048/- (which fall in
                                         income Tax Payee) & income Tax
                                         comes to Rs.9000/-

     Net annual income           :       Rs.1,11,048/-


                                                                            (4 of 4)                 [CMA-1472/2005]


                                        after deduction of
                                        income tax.

Total loss of income : 1,11,048 + 30% - 1/4 x 13 +77000/-

= Rs.14,84,533/-

Less : Award by Tribunal : Rs. 4,23,520/-

Enhanced award : Rs. 10, 61,013/-

In view of the discussions made above, the present appeal is

partly allowed. The respondent Insurance company is directed to

pay an enhanced amount of Rs.10,61,013/- as compensation to

the appellants-claimants, in addition to the amount already

awarded by the Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today.

The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry an interest @

6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the same is

actually paid to the appellants.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

89-Anil Singh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)