Rajasthan High Court
Smt. Koyali Devi W/O Ram Pratap @ ... vs Badri Prasad S/O Shri Anarma Jat on 4 July, 2022
Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4192/2018
1. Smt. Koyali Devi W/o Ram Pratap @ Mukesh, Aged About
20 Years, R/o Village Khora Ladkhani Police Station
Manoharpur District Jaipur (Raj)
2. Hitesh @ Hansraj S/o Ram Pratap @mukesh, Aged About
2 Years, Minor Through Natural Guardian And Mother
Smt. Koyali Devi W/o Ram Pratap @ Mukesh Kumar R/o
Village Khora Ladkhani Police Station Manoharpur District
Jaipur (Raj)
3. Sitaram S/o Sugan Chand, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
Village Khora Ladkhani Police Station Manoharpur District
Jaipur (Raj)
4. Smt. Shanti Devi W/o Sitaram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Village Khora Ladkhani Police Station Manoharpur District
Jaipur (Raj)
5. Smt. Dapha Devi W/o Sugan Chand, Aged About 60
Years, R/o Village Khora Ladkhani Police Station
Manoharpur District Jaipur (Raj)
----Appellants/Claimants
Versus
1. Badri Prasad S/o Shri Anarma Jat, R/o Village Dher Ki
Dhani Tan Kant Tehsil Shahpura District Jaipur (Raj)
(Driver)
2. Kailash Chandra S/o Chajuram, R/o Chopyawali Dhani Tan
Khoraladkhani Tehsil Shahpura District Jaipur (Raj)
(Owner)
3. The New India Assurance Company Limited Through
Regional Manager, Office Nehru Place Tonk Road Jaipur
District Jaipur (Insurance Company)
Non-Claimant/Respondent
4. Sugan Chand S/o Kaluram Jat, aged 65 years, R/o Village
Khora Ladkhani Police Station Manoharpur District Jaipur
(Raj)
----Proforma Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sita Ram Joshi
(2 of 5) [CMA-4192/2018]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Judgment
04/07/2022
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that though
respondent No. 4 Sugan Chand has expired and his legal
representatives are already on the record.
With the consent of counsel appearing for the parties,
arguments have been heard on merits.
Instant civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants-
claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for
short 'the Act of 1988') against the judgment and award dated
20.04.2018 passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Shahpura, District Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') in
claim case No. 201/2010, whereby an amount of Rs. 7,14,680/-
has been awarded as compensation on account of death of Ram
Pratap @ Mukesh Kumar in an accident which occurred on
31.01.2010.
Learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the
evidence available on the record and after hearing the counsel for
the parties, decided the claim petition of the claimants appellants
awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,14,680/- under
various heads in favour of the claimants appellants.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal
while assessing the income of the deceased treated him as an
unskilled labour and on the basis of the same, his monthly income
was determined as Rs. 2600/-. Counsel further submits that the
Tribunal has determined the monthly income of the deceased by
counting his minimum wages for 26 days only. Counsel submits
that his minimum wages should have been determined for 30 days
(3 of 5) [CMA-4192/2018]
instead of 26 days. In support of his contentions, counsel for the
appellants has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Jalaur Singh @
Dilawar Singh and Anr. Vs. Barkat Singh and Ors., reported
in 2012 R.A.R. 499 (Raj.). Counsel further submits that under
the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned award
needs suitable enhancement.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance
submits that the Tribunal while deciding the claim petition of the
claimants appellants has correctly taken into consideration the
factors while calculating the award in this case on the anvil of
evidence produced before it. Thus, the judgment and award dated
20.04.2018 does not call for any interference by this Court.
Counsel further submits that the appellants No. 3 and 4 are not
dependents of the deceased, hence, they are not entitled to get
any sort of compensation.
Learned counsel, however, is not in a position to controvert
the submissions made by the counsel for the claimants appellants
with respect to re-computation of the award in the present case in
the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Jalaur Singh
@ Dilawar Singh (supra).
I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and
gone through the judgment and award dated 20.04.2018 as well
as the other documents available on the record.
Admittedly, the deceased was working as an unskilled labour
and his minimum wages have been taken into consideration for
determining the income for 26 days. In view of the judgment of
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Jalaur Singh @
Dilawar Singh (supra), the minimum wages should have been
(4 of 5) [CMA-4192/2018]
considered for 30 days instead of 26 days. It is not in dispute that
the appellants No. 3 and 4 are not dependents of the deceased,
hence, they are not entitled to get any amount of compensation.
Thus, the award is re-computed as under:-
Monthly income Rs.100 X 30 = Rs.3,000/-
Annual income Rs. 3,000/- X 12 = Rs. 36,000/- per
annum
36,000X 18 = Rs./-6,48,000/-
Deduction 1/4 towards Rs.6,48,000 - Rs.1,62,000
personal expenses = Rs. 4,86,000/-
Add 40 per cent towards Rs. 4,86,000 + Rs. 1,94,400
future prospects = Rs. 6,80,400/-
Add general expenses Rs. 70,000/-
(conventional) (as awarded
by the Tribunal)
Loss of Love and Affection Rs. 55,000/-
(as awarded by the Tribunal)
Total compensation Rs. 6,80,400 + Rs. 70,000 + Rs. 55,000
awardable =Rs. 8,05,400/-
Less amount awarded by the Rs. 8,05,400 - Rs. 7,14,680 =
Tribunal Rs.90,720/-
Enhanced amount of Rs. 90,720/-
compensation
Thus, an amount of Rs. 90,720/- is enhanced in the present
case. The respondent -Insurance Company is directed to pay the
enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 90,720/- in addition to
the amount already awarded by the Tribunal vide its judgment
dated 20.04.2018 within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a certified copy of this order. The enhanced amount shall
carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
petition till the actual payment is made.
It is made clear that while disbursing the enhanced amount
of compensation, the Tribunal is directed to disburse the same to
appellant Nos. 1, 2 and 5 only.
With the above observations, the appeal stands disposed of.
(5 of 5) [CMA-4192/2018]
All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
Ritu/19
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
