Rajasthan High Court
Smt Mumtaj And Others vs Punji Lal Yadav And Others on 17 February, 2022
Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 6249/2011
1. Smt Mumtaj wife of Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
2. Mohammad Shakil son of Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
3. Mohammad Shakir son of Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
4. Mohammad Sajid son of Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
5. Mohammad Abbas son of Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
6. Rukhsana d/o Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
7. Mohammad Sameer son of Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
8. Saniya Banu d/o Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
Appellant Nos. 3 to 8 are minor through their natural
guardian mother Smt. Mumtaj wife of Lt. Sh. Sharif Mohammad
All resident of Village Nundri Mehdratan, Tehsil Beawar, Distt.
Ajmer.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Punji Lal Yadav son of Sh. Ratan, r/o Village Nejpur, Post
Upargown, P.S. Sadar, Dist. Dungarpur (Driver of the Mini Bus
No.RJ-12P-1611)
2. Pratap Singh Panwar son of Sh. Dheeraj Singh resident of
Village Tijwad, P.S. Sadar, Distt. Dungarpur (Owner of the Mini
Bus No.RJ-12P-1611)
3. National Insurance Company Ltd. through Branch Manager,
Branch Office at Beawar having its Regional Office at LIC
Building, Ambedkar Circle, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur (Insurer
of the Mini Bus No.RJ-12P-1611)
----Non-claimants/Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma and
Mr. Jaip Prakash Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sweety Mishra
Mr. Deshraj Kalwania
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
17/02/2022
The instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants against
the judgment and award dated 20.07.2011, passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge (Fast Track
Court No.1), Beawar (for short 'Tribunal') in MAC Case No.36/2011
(2 of 5) [CMA-6249/2011]
(163/2010), whereby, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.
4,55,000/- on account of death of Sharif Mohammad, which
occurred on 08.09.2009.
Learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the
evidence available on record and hearing both the sides, decided
the claim petition of the appellants and awarded compensation of
Rs.4,55000/- under various heads.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that deceased
was aged about 40 years at the time of accident and he was
working as 'Mistri' which falls within the definition of skilled labour
and at the prevalent time, the minimum wages of skilled labour
was Rs.115/- per day i.e. Rs.3450/- per month. While the learned
Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3000/-
only without any basis.
Counsel for the appellant further submitted that the number
of dependants were eight and as per the principles laid down in
the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation: (2009) 6
SCC 121, the deduction of 1/5th should have been applied while
the Tribunal has deducted 1/4th towards income of the deceased.
Learned counsel further submitted that no amount has been
awarded in the head of future prospects in the light of the
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. : (2017) 16 SCC 680.
Learned counsel further submitted that as per the judgment of
Pranay Sethi (supra), looking to the age of of the deceased i.e. 40
years, the claimant-appellants are entitled to get future prospects
of 25 per cent. Lastly, he argued that under the conventional
heads, namely loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral
expenses, the claimant-appellants are entitled to get amount of
(3 of 5) [CMA-6249/2011]
Rs.70,000/- while the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.10,000/- only and thus he prayed that the impugned judgment
and award passed by the learned Tribunal needs suitable
enhancement.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance
Company as well as counsel appearing for owner of the vehicle
submitted that the learned Tribunal while deciding the claim
petition of the appellants has rightly taken into consideration the
factors while calculating the amount of compensation, on the case
anvil of the evidence produced before it. Thus, there is no
justification for enhancement of compensation.
Learned counsel for the respondent, however, are not in a
position to controvert the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants with respect to re-computation of the
award in the present case in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of 'Sarla Verma & Ors. (supra)' and
'Pranay Sethi (supra)'.
I have considered the submissions made at bar and gone
through the judgment dated 20.07.2011, as well as the other
relevant documents available on the record. Admittedly, the
deceased Sharif Mohammad was aged about 40 years at the time
of accident and therefore the learned Tribunal was not right in
applying the deduction of 1/4th looking to the number of
dependants of the deceased. The learned Tribunal has failed in
taking into consideration the minimum wages of the skilled labour
prevaling at the releant time when the accident occurred. Once,
when the learned Tribunal has determined that the deceased was
working as Motor Mechanic (Mistri) which falls within the definition
(4 of 5) [CMA-6249/2011]
of skilled labour, and at the releant time, the minimum wages of
the skilled labour was Rs.3450/- per month.
Since, no compensation has been awarded in the head of
future prospects, 25% of the annual income is to be added to the
yearly income of the deceased in the light of the judgment of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Pranay Sethi (supra)". As
per the principles enunciated in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra),
the appellants are also entitled to get Rs. 70,000/- in the
conventional head.
In view of the material available on record and the law laid
down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra), the
appellants-claimants are entitled to get compensation in the
following terms:-
Monthly income Rs. 3450/-
Annual income Rs. 3450 x12 = Rs.41,400/- per annum
41,400 X 15 = Rs.6,21,000/-
Less 1/5 towards personal Rs. 621,000/- - Rs. 1,24,200/-
expenses = Rs. 4,96,800/-
Add 25 per cent towards Rs.4,96,000 + Rs. 1,24,000-
future prospects = Rs. 6,21,000/-
Add general expenses Rs. 70,000/-
(conventional)
Total compensation Rs. 6,21,000+70,000 = Rs. 6,91,000/-
awardable
Less amount awarded by the Rs. 6,91,000 -4,55,000 = Rs. 2,36,000/-
Tribunal
Enhanced amount of Rs. 2,36,000/-
compensation
In view of the above, the appellants-claimants would be
entitled to get a further sum of Rs. 2,36,000/-, which shall carry
interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition
till the actual payment is made.
Consequently, the appeal is disposed of. The enhanced
compensation shall be paid by the Insurance Company within a
(5 of 5) [CMA-6249/2011]
period of six weeks of this judgment. The Tribunal shall disburse
the enhanced money through the joint saving bank account of the
claimants.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
HEENA GANDHI /7
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
