Rajasthan High Court
Raju Dhobi S/O Shri Harinarayan @ ... vs Jumma Khan S/O Shri Deen Khan on 29 August, 2022
Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 6357/2019
Raju Dhobi S/o Shri Harinarayan @ Hariom, Aged About 24
Years, R/o Govind Nagar, Mahapura Road, Kalwad, Police Station
Sez, Sanganer, Jaipur, (Raj.)
---Claimant-appellant
Versus
1. Jumma Khan S/o Shri Deen Khan, R/o 86, Mohalla
Barwan, Village Harsoli, Tehsil Dudu, District Jaipur (Raj.)
(Driver Truck Dumper No. Mp-28-H-0199)
2. M/s A B Construction, Through Proprietor Virendra Kumar
Choudhary S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad Choudhary, R/o P-
1/1, L.i.c. Flat, Sector-6, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Police Station
Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) (Vehicle Owner Truck
Dumper No. Mp-28-H-0199)
3. Bhartiya Axa General Insurance Company Limited,
Through Manager, Office- First Floor, Royal World City
Center Ke Samne, Sansar Chandra Road, Ps Jalupura,
Jaipur.
Policy No. Afcv/s27408/2/r-1/09/d5R118 Validity Date
26.09.2014 To 25.09.2015. (Insurance Company Of
Vehicle No. Mp-28-H-0199)
----Respondents
For claimant(s) : Mr. Bhanu Prakash Verma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.S. Jodha
None present for respondent Nos.1
and 2.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
29/08/2022
Instant appeal has been preferred by the claimant/appellant
(for short 'the claimant') against the judgment and award dated
30.09.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1
Jaipur Metro, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No.
172/15, by which claim petition filed by the claimant has been
partly allowed and the respondent-Insurance Company has been
directed to pay a compensation of Rs.5,75,880/- on account of the
injuries and permanent disability suffered by the claimant in the
accident occurred on 18.10.2014.
Learned Tribunal after framing of issues, evaluating the
evidence available on record and after hearing counsel for the
parties decided the claim petition of the claimant, awarding
compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,75,880/- under various heads
in favour of the claimant.
Counsel for the claimant submits that in the aforesaid
accident, the injured-claimant has suffered 60% permanent
disability and his right leg has been amputated which has affected
his loss of income. Counsel submits that 60% permanent disability
of the claimant has been considered as 30% only. Counsel
submits that the minimum wages of an unskilled labour were
Rs.189/- per day at the prevailing time when the accident
occurred but without any basis, the Tribunal has considered the
lump-sum monthly income of the deceased as Rs.4000/-. Counsel
submits that even under the head of pain and suffering a very
inadequate amount of Rs.50,000/- has been awarded, hence the
impugned award needs suitable enhancement by this Court.
Counsel submits that the Tribunal has exonerated the
respondent Insurance Company from its liability to make payment
of compensation on the ground that the owner of the vehicle was
not having any valid permit to ply the vehicle. Counsel submits
that in case of Amrit Pal Singh and Anr. vs. TATA A.I.G
General Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors., reported in AIR
2018 SC 2662. The Hon'ble Apex Court has issued certain
directions in the matter akin to the present one, directing the
respondent-Insurance Company to make the payment of
compensation to the claimant and thereafter recover the same
from the driver and owner of the vehicle.
Despite the notice upon the respondent Nos.1 & 2, none has
put in appearance on behalf of them. Counsel for the respondent-
Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has not committed
an error while deciding and calculating the amount as there was a
breach of policy and the owner of the vehicle was not in
possession of valid permit.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance
Company submits that the Tribunal while deciding the claim
petition of the claimant has correctly taken into consideration all
the factors while calculating the award on the anvil of the evidence
produced before it. Thus, the judgment 30.09.2019 does not call
for any inference by this Court.
I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone
through the impugned judgment dated 30.09.2019 as well as the
other relevant materials available on record. This fact is not in
dispute that in the aforesaid accident, the injured has sustained
60% permanent disability and because of the injuries, his right leg
has been amputated which has affected the income of the injured.
In calculating the loss of income of the injured his 60% permanent
disability should have been taken into consideration. It is also
pertinent to note here that at the prevailing time, the minimum
wages of unskilled labour was Rs. 189/- but without any basis, the
Tribunal has determined the monthly wages of the injured as
Rs.4000/-. Perusal of the impugned award indicates that a very
petty amount Rs.50,000/- only has been awarded to the injured
looking to the 60% permanent disability of the claimant. Thus,
the award is liable to be enhanced/modified and the award is
recomputed as under:-
Monthly income Rs. 189 x 30 = Rs.5,670/-
Annual Income (with Rs.5,670 x 12 x 60/100 = Rs.40,824/-
permanent disability)
Add 40 % towards future Rs.40,824 + 16,329/-
prospects = Rs. 57,153/-
Rs. 57,153 x 18 = Rs. 10,28,764/-
Towards pain and suffering Rs.1,50,000/-
Total compensation Rs. 11,78,764/-
awardable
Less amount awarded by the Rs. 11,78,764 - Rs.5,75,880/-
Tribunal Rs. 6,02,884/-
Enhanced amount of Rs. 6,02,884/-
compensation
Thus, an amount of Rs. 6,02,884/- is enhanced in the
present case and the respondent-Insurance Company is directed
to pay the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the
amount of compensation already awarded in terms of the
judgment and award dated 30.09.2019 within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The
enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of filing
of the claim petition till the actual payment is made.
The Tribunal is directed to disburse 50% amount in the
Saving Bank Account of the claimant and rest of the enhanced
amount be kept in any nationalized bank in FDR initially for a
period of one year to be renewed every year. The Insurance
Company would be at liberty to recover the amount paid to the
claimant from the driver and owner of the vehicle.
The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.
All pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
Pcg/40 (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
