Rajasthan High Court

Suresh Gautam vs Parvej Khan And Anr Thr Lrs on 4 July, 2022

Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

            S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2057/2017

Suresh Gautam S/o Shri Ramavatar, R/o 1031, Basant Bihar,
Kota Raj.
                                                         ----Appellant/Claimant
                                    Versus
1.     Parvej Khan S/o Shri Shaukat Ali, R/o 132, Near Kotadi
       Nallah, Tehsil Ladpura, Distt. Kota Raj. (Driver RJ-20-PA-
       1188)
2.     Shaukat Ali S/o Shri Abdul Rajjak (Since Deceased)
2/1.   Naseem Bano W/o Late Shri Shaukat Ali, R/o 132, Near
       Kotadi Nallah, Tehsil Ladpura, Distt. Kota Raj. Legal
       Representative Of Owner RJ-20-PA-1188)
2/2.   Parvej Khan S/o Late Shri Shaukat Ali,                    R/o 132, Near
       Kotadi Nallah, Tehsil Ladpura, Distt. Kota Raj. Legal
       Representative Of Owner RJ-20-PA-1188)
2/3.   Firoj Khan S/o Late Shri Shaukat Ali,                     R/o 132, Near
       Kotadi Nallah, Tehsil Ladpura, Distt. Kota Raj. Legal
       Representative Of Owner RJ-20-PA-1188)
2/4.   Nadeem Khan S/o Late Shri Shaukat Ali, R/o 132, Near
       Kotadi Nallah, Tehsil Ladpura, Distt. Kota Raj. Legal
       Representative Of Owner RJ-20-PA-1188)
3.     The United India Insurance Company Limited, Regional
       Office, Vishal Chamber, Tonk Road, Jaipur Raj. Through
       Regional Manager
                                           ----Non-Claimants/Respondents

For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. Sandeep Mathur
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Rizwan Ahmed



       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

                                 Judgment

04/07/2022





                                          (2 of 5)                [CMA-2057/2017]

Matter comes up on an application filed by the applicant

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in

filing the appeal.

Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act stands

allowed for the reasons stated therein. Delay in filing the appeal is

condoned.

With the consent of counsel appearing for the parties,

arguments have been heard on merits.

The present civil misc. appeal has been filed by the

appellant-claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988') against the judgment and award

dated 25.11.2016 passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal No.1, Kota (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No.

1407/2014, whereby an amount of Rs. 1,97,000/- has been

awarded as compensation for the injuries sustained by the

appellant in an accident which occurred on 27.08.2009..

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 claimant appellant

awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,97,000/- under

various heads in favour of the claimant appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant claimant submits that in

the aforesaid accident, the injured sustained multiple injuries and

on account of those injuries, he has sustained 24% permanent

disability and because of that 24% permanent disability, his knee

movements have been restricted and as per the disability

certificate right leg of the appellant has shortened. Counsel further

submits that the Tribunal has determined the permanent disability

of the appellant as 15% without any basis. Counsel further

(3 of 5) [CMA-2057/2017]

submits that a very meager amount under the head of pain and

suffering has been awarded by the Tribunal and no amount

towards future prospects has been awarded in the light of the

judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. :

(2017) 16 SCC 680. Counsel for the appellant, therefore, prays

that re-computation of the award in the present case may be done

in the light the aforesaid submissions and in the light of the

judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

Pranay Sethi (supra).

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance

Company submits that the Tribunal while deciding the claim

petition of the claimant appellant 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 25.11.2016 does not call for any interference by

this Court.

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 submissions made by the counsel for the appellant

hereinabove and in the light of the judgment delivered by the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra).

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and

gone through the judgment and award dated 25.11.2016 as well

as the material available on the record.

It is not in dispute that in the accident occurred on

27.08.2009, the appellant has sustained multiple injuries and 24%

permanent disability. His permanent disability certificate (Ex. 61)

(4 of 5) [CMA-2057/2017]

clearly indicates that the appellant has sustained 24% permanent

disability and as per the endorsement made at the bottom of this

disability certificate, it is clear that knee movements of the

appellant have been restricted and his right leg has been

shortened. Genuineness of this certificate cannot doubted as this

certificate has been issued by the Medical Board of Government

Hospital. The judgment reveals that without any basis the Tribunal

has treated the 24% permanent disability of the appellant as

15% and under the head of pain and suffering inadequate amount

has been awarded. Further the amount to the extent of 40% is

required to be added towards future prospects in the light of the

judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

Pranay Sethi (supra)

Thus, the award is re-computed as under:-

Monthly income Rs. 4500/- X 24% = Rs. 1,080/- Annual income Rs. 1,080 x12 = Rs.12,960/- per annum

12,960 X 16 = Rs.2,07,360/-

Add 40 per cent towards Rs.2,07,360 + Rs. 82,944 future prospects = Rs. 2,90,304/-

Lumpsum amount towards Rs. 50,000/- - Rs. 23,172 pain and suffering (Less = Rs. 26,828/-

amount already awarded by Tribunal) Towards Medical Bills (As Rs. 37,478/-

awarded by the Tribunal)
For   simple    injury   (As Rs. 1,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal)
For   hospitalization    (As Rs. 750/-
awarded by the Tribunal)

For healthy diet (As awarded Rs. 5,000/-

by the Tribunal) Total compensation Rs. 2,90,304/- + Rs. 26,828 + Rs. awardable 37,478 + Rs. 1,000 + Rs. 750 + Rs.

5,000 = Rs. 3,61,360/-

Less amount awarded by the Rs.   3,61,360                   -    Rs.1,97,000   =
Tribunal                   Rs.1,64,360/-
Enhanced amount of                Rs. 1,64,360/-
compensation




                                                                            (5 of 5)                [CMA-2057/2017]

Thus, an amount of Rs. 1,64,360/- is enhanced in the

present case. The respondent - Insurance Company is directed to

pay the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 1,64,360/- in

addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal vide its

judgment dated 25.11.2016 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 further ordered that out of the enhanced amount the

Tribunal shall disburse a sum of Rs.50,000/- in the Saving Bank

Account of the claimant-appellant and the balance amount of the

enhanced compensation be invested in any Nationalized Bank