Bhuneshwari And Ors vs Goverdhan And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2986 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2206/2007

1. Bhuvneshwari w/o late Shri Rajkumar, aged about 32 years

2. Anurag s/o late Shri Rajkumar, aged about 9 years,

3. Lalit s/o late Shri Rajkumar, aged about 7 years All by caste Vyas, resident of Chhabili Ghati, Bikaner. (Appellants-claimants No.2 & 3 are minor through their natural guardian mother-Bhuvneshwari w/o late Shri Rajkumar.

----Appellant/Claimants Versus

1. Goverdhan s/o Shri Purkha Ram, by caste Meghwal, resident of Bod, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

(Driver)

2. Lakhu Bhai s/o Shri Narayan Bhai, by caste Hethwaria, resident of Ajayar, Tehsil Anzar, District Kuchh Bhuj, Gujarat.

(Owner)

3. United India Insurace Company Ltd. Gandhidham, Kutch (Gujarat) through Branch Office, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Panchshati Circle, Bikaner. (Insurer)

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr.Prashant Panwar, Mr.Anish Bhadala & Mr.Murli Sain for Mr.Rajesh Panwar, Sr. Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr.A.K.Dadhich, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Order

24/02/2022

Instant misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants-

claimants against the judgment & award dated 28.05.2007 passed

by learned Special Judge, SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Court

and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bikaner whereby the learned

(2 of 4) [CMA-2206/2007]

Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.5,09,176/- in favour

of the appellants-claimants with interest at the rate of 6% per

annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.

While praying for enhancement, learned counsel for the

appellants submits that the appellant-claimant No.1 Bhuvneshwari

herself examined before the Tribunal as AW-1 and she

categorically stated that her husband was working as Lower

Division Clerk in Employment Department of State Government

and he used to earn Rs.7,345/- per month. The learned Tribunal

wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.5502/-. The

learned Tribunal also used the wrong principle for application of

the multiplier. The deceased was 33 years of age at the time of

accident and the learned Tribunal ought to have applied the

multiplier of 17 instead of 11. It is also contended that the learned

Tribunal further erred in not taking into account future prospects

and advancement in life and career of the deceased. It is settled

law that the future prospects of advancement in life and career

should also be sounded in terms of money to augment the

multiplicand. It is prayed that the amount of compensation

awarded by the Tribunal may be enhanced.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance

Company while vehemently opposing the prayer of the appellants

has submitted that amount granted by the Tribunal is fair and just.

Therefore, no interference is required in the impugned judgment

and award.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned

counsel for the respondents and perused the award impugned.

The learned Tribunal after taking into account the documents

placed on record by the claimants has rightly assessed the

(3 of 4) [CMA-2206/2007]

monthly income of the deceased as Rs.5502/-. However,

considering the fact that the deceased was 33 years of age at the

time of accident, this Court is of the opinion that while calculating

the amount of compensation, the multiplier of 16 ought to have

been applied by the learned Tribunal instead of 11 in the light of

the judgment of the Hon'ble Surpeme Court in the case of Sarla

Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009)

6 SCC 121. Further, the amount of compensation awarded by the

Tribunal to the claimants Rs.10,000/- towards spousal consortium,

Rs.10000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs.5000/-

towards funeral expenses needs to be increased in the facts and

circumstances of the case. Moreover, the future prospects are also

required to be added while calculating the amount of

compensation in the present case in view of the judgments of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of National Insurance

Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and New India

Insurance Company Ltd.V/s Somwati and Ors. (2020) 9 SCC 644.

Accordingly, the re-computation of the award shall be as under :-

Income                      : Rs.5502/- (per month)

Age                         : 33 years

Deduction                   : 1/3

Multiplier                  :16

Future Prospects            : 50%

Calculation: 5502X12X16X1/3X50%= Rs.10,56,384/-

For loss of love & affection and funeral expenses=Rs.70,000/-

Total amount of compensation : Rs.11,26,384/-

Amount awarded by the Tribunal : Rs.5,09,176/-

(4 of 4) [CMA-2206/2007]

Enhanced amount : 11,26,384 - 5,09,176 = Rs.6,17,208/-

along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of passing of

award.

In view of the above, the amount of compensation awarded

by learned Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.6,17,208/- along with

interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of passing of award.

Accordingly, the civil misc. appeal is partly allowed. The

enhanced amount of Rs.6,17,208/- (Six Lakh Seventeen Thousand

Two Hundred Eight only) shall be paid by the Insurance Company

to the appellants-claimants, in addition to the amount already

awarded by the Tribunal vide order dt. 28.05.2007, within a period

of four weeks from today. If the enhanced amount is not paid

within the stipulated period, the claimants-appellants shall be

entitled to an interest @ 7% p.a on the said amount. The amount

so deposited by the Insurance Company shall be deposited in the

Saving Account of the claimants, detail of which shall be furnished

by the claimants before the Tribunal.

Record of the trial court be sent back immediately.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 163-NK/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)