Asmita Meena D/O Shri Harkesh ... vs Daulatram Choudhary S/O Shri ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5675 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

           S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1089/2022

Harkesh Meena S/o Shri Basantaram Meena, R/o Pushkunj
Society, Haarij, Police Station Haarij, District Paatan, North
Gujarat.
                                                                   ----Appellant
                                   Versus
1.     Daulatram Choudhary S/o Shri Baluram Choudhary, R/o
       153, Gabola Ki Dhani, Jebliyo Ka Baas, Mokhampura,
       Tehsil Dudu, District Jaipur. (Vehicle Driver & Registered
       Owner Tractor No. RJ 14-RB-4126).
2.     H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., through
       Manager, Registered Office At Reman House, H.T. Parik
       Marg, 169, Bekbey Reclamation, Mumbai-400020, Jaipur
       Office- C-Scheme, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents

Connected With S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1102/2022 Sushila Meena W/o Shri Harkesh Meena, (Development Officer, Life Insurance Corporation Of India) Aged About 41 Years, R/o Pushkunj Society, Haarij, Police Station Haarij, District Paatan, North Gujarat.

----Appellant Versus

1. Daulatram Choudhary S/o Shri Baluram Choudhary, R/o 153, Gabola Ki Dhani, Jebliyo Ka Baas, Mokhampura, Tehsil Dudu, District Jaipur.

(Vehicle Driver & Registered Owner Tractor No. RJ 14-RB- 4126).

2. H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., Through Manager, Registered Office At Reman House, H.T. Parik Marg, 169, Bekbey Reclamation Mumbai-400020, Jaipur Office- C-Scheme, Jaipur.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1197/2022 Asmita Meena D/o Shri Harkesh Meena, (Development Officer, Life Insurance Corporation Of India), Aged About 18 Years, R/o

(2 of 6) [CMA-1089/2022]

Pushkunj Society, Haarij, Police Station Haarij, District Paatan, North Gujarat.

----Appellant Versus

1. Daulatram Choudhary S/o Shri Baluram Choudhary, R/o 153, Gabola Ki Dhani, Jebliyo Ka Bass, Mokhampura, Tehsil Dudu, District Jaipur. (Vehicle Driver and Registered Owner Tractor No. RJ 14-RB-4126).

2. H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., Through Manager, Registered Office At Reman House, H.T. Parik Marg, 169, Bekbey Reclamation, Mumbai-400020, Jaipur Office-C-Scheme, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Mohammed Anees, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

Judgment

22/08/2022

These three appeals have been filed by the appellants-

claimants (for short, 'the claimants') for enhancement of the

amount of compensation against the judgment dated 14.12.2021

passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District

Jaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal has

awarded a sum of Rs. 15,953/- as compensation alongwith

interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing the claim petition till its

realization in MAC Case No. 571/2017 (2045/2011) tilted Kumari

Asmita Versus Daulat Ram Choudhary & Ors; Rs. 2,76,311/- as

compensation alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing

the claim petition till its realization in MAC Case No. 572/2017

(2046/2011) tilted Smt. Sushila Meena Versus Daulat Ram

Choudhary & Ors; and Rs. 24,939/- as compensation alongwith

(3 of 6) [CMA-1089/2022]

interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing the claim petition till its

realization in MAC Case No. 569/2017 (175/2016) tilted Harkesh

Meena Versus Daulat Ram Choudhary & Ors.

Facts of the case are that on 11.6.2011, Asmita,

Sushila Meena, Harkesh Meena and Ajay Meena were going in a

Car from their residence at Patan Gujarat. The Car was being

driven in its right side with controlled speed. At about 10.15 AM, a

Tractor alongwith trolley, being driven by its driver rashly and

negligently, came from opposite direction in wrong side and hit

the car, as a result of which the claimants sustained injuries.

Three claim petitions were filed. Motor Accident Claim

Case Nos. 571/2017 (2045/2011) and 572/2017 (2046/2011)

were filed by the claimants Asmita Meena and Sushila Meena

respectively seeking compensation under Section 166 and 140 of

the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Motor Vehicle (Amendment)

Act, 1994 readwith Rule 10 (2) of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicle

Rules, 1990, whereas Motor Accident Claim Case No. 569/2017

(175/2016) was filed by the claimant Harkesh Meena seeking

compensation on account of loss of estate / property and other

damages.

Written statement was filed. Necessary issues were

framed and after hearing the arguments, the Tribunal has passed

the aforesaid judgment and award dated 14.12.2021. Being

dissatisfied with the same, aforesaid three appeals have been

filed.

Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the

Tribunal has awarded a lesser amount of compensation. Hence,

the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is

required to be modified.

                                            (4 of 6)                  [CMA-1089/2022]



            Heard. Considered.

So far as the Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1197/2022 filed by

the appellant Asmita Meena is concerned, as per the averments

in the claim petition, she was about 7 years of age at the time of

accident. In the said accident, the claimant Asmita Meena was

said to have suffered permanent disability in her left hand. The

Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award dated

14.12.2021 noted that in order to prove the same, no

documentary evidence or certificate of the Medical Board was

produced which could establish that the appellant Asmita Meena

sustained permanent disability in her left hand. Rather from Ex.

221, no fracture was found and the claimant Asmita Meena was

found to have suffered only two simple injuries. In this view of the

matter, in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Versus

Pranay Sethi and others {SLP (Civil) No. 25590/2014 dated

31.10.2017}; the Tribunal awarded Rs. 5000/- for two simple

injuries (Rs. 2500/- for each simple injury). The Tribunal also

awarded Rs. 3300/- for three days' admission of the appellant

Asmita Meena in the hospital (@ Rs. 1100/- per day) and

nutritional diet, attendant etc; Rs. 2653/- towards medical bills;

Rs. 3000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 2000/- under the head

of pain and suffering. Thus, the Tribunal has rightly awarded a

just compensation of Rs. 15,953/- in favour of the appellant

Asmita Meena alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing

the claim petition till its realization.

So far as Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1102/2022 filed by the

appellant Sushila Meena is concerned, the Tribunal noted that

although she was said to be earning Rs. 6000/- per month by

(5 of 6) [CMA-1089/2022]

tuition, but to prove the same no documentary evidence was

produced. In the absence of any documentary evidence with

regard to the income of the appellant Sushila Meena, her income

was assessed at Rs. 3510/- per month on the basis of minimum

wages, as prevalent at the relevant point of time for unskilled

labourers and for two months' earning loss, the Tribunal awarded

Rs. 7020/-. Further, the appellant Sushila Meena was said to be

31 years of age at the time of accident. Thus, in the light of the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla

Verma Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and Another (Appeal

No. 3483/2008; decided on 15.4.2009), the Tribunal rightly

applied the multiplier of 16. Although the appellant Sushila Meena

was said to have suffered 21.50% permanent disability and that

was not in relation to her whole body, despite that the Tribunal

considered the same in relation to the whole body and calculated

the amount thus:

3510 X 12 = Rs. 42,120 X 21.50 = 9056 X 16 = Rs. 1,44,896/-

In this view of the matter, total amount under the head

of loss of income was arrived at Rs. 1,51,916/- (Rs. 1,44,896/- +

Rs. 7020/-).

As per Operation Note (Ex.-17), the appellant Sushila

Meena was operated twice on 11.6.201 and 15.6.2011 for fracture

in neck and shoulder. In this view of the matter, the appellant

Sushila Meena was awarded Rs. 10,000/- for two operations (@

Rs. 5000/- for each operation); pain and suffering etc. The

Tribunal also awarded Rs. 45,395/- under the head of medical bills

and medical expenses incurred on treatment; Rs. 66,000/- (@ Rs.

1100/- for two months' admission in the hospital) as also Rs.

3000/- under the head of loss of estate / property. Thus, the

(6 of 6) [CMA-1089/2022]

Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs. 2,76,311/- as compensation in

favour of appellant Sushila Meena.

With regard to Civil Misc. Appeal No.1089/2022 filed by

Harkesh Meena is concerned, he was said to be working as

Development Officer, Life Insurance Corporation of India. During

his cross-examination, he admitted that he did not produce any

leave certificate from his office. He was said to have lodged the

report with regard to theft of mobile and purse, but copy of the

First Information Report as also the investigation report were not

placed on record. Since the appellant Harkesh Meena had already

received a sum of Rs. 1,45,000/- towards damage of the Car from

the Insurance Co. concerned, therefore, the Tribunal rightly did

not award any award of compensation under the head of loss of

estate / property. However, keeping in view of the fact that the

appellant himself was residing in Gujarat and his wife and

daughter remained admitted in SMS Hospital, Jaipur and he might

have visited Jaipur to take care of them, on the basis of tickets

(Ex. 152 to Ex. 208), the Tribunal awarded Rs. 24,939/- as a

compensation for travelling expenses.

The findings arrived at by the Tribunal are just and

proper, with which I fully concur.

For the aforesaid reasons, I find no force in these

appeals and the same being bereft of any merit are liable to be

dismissed, which stand dismissed accordingly.

Registry is directed to place a copy of this judgment in

each connected file.

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

DK/26-28

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)