Chanky Taneja S/O Harish Taneja vs Icici Lombard General Insurance ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4545 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

          S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5964/2019

1.     Chanky Taneja S/o Harish Taneja, Aged About 33 Years,
       R/o Plot No. 9,krishna Vihar, Bajrang Nagar, Kota (Raj)
2.     Smt. Jasvinder Kaur W/o Chanky Taneja, Aged About 30
       Years, R/o Plot No. 9,krishna Vihar, Bajrang Nagar, Kota
       (Raj)
                                                     ---Claimants-Appellants
                                  Versus
1.     ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited,
       Jhalawar Road, Kota (Raj) (Insurer Crane No. Rj-09-Ea-
       2977)
2.     Tejpal S/o Janki Das Vaishnav, R/o Rajgarh, P.s. Paarsauli,
       Distt. Chittorgarh, Kota Raj. (Driver Crane No. Rj-09-Ea-
       2977)
3.     M/s Krishanchand Somani (Huf), Through Krishanchand
       Somani S/o Babu Lal Somani Aged 45 Years, R/o Rajgarh,
       P.s. Paarsauli Distt. Chittorgarh, Kota (Raj) (Regd. Owner
       Crane No. Rj-09-Ea-2977)
                                          ---Non-claimants-Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Rathore, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Judgment

06/07/2022 Instant appeal has been preferred by the claimant-

sappellants for enhancement of compensation, assailing the

judgment and award dated 08.08.2019 passed by the Court of

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2, Kota (hereinafter referred to

as 'Tribunal') in MAC case No. 207/2017 (67/2015) by which

compensation of Rs. 12,37,520/- has been awarded alongwith

interest @ 7.5% in favour of the claimants-appellants.

(2 of 3) [CMA-5964/2019]

Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants submits that the

claimants-appellants had filed the claim petition under Section 140/166

of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the Act of 1988) to claim

compensation after the death of Harish Taneja who died in an accident

on 16.05.2014, which was allowed and the Tribunal has awarded

compensation as indicated above.

However, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation,

the claimants-appellants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of

compensation.

Heard learned counsel for the claimants-appellants on merits of

the appeal.

Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants submits that the

Tribunal has committed an error in deducting 1/2 towards personal

expenses of the deceased. He further submits that there is no such

provision under the law for deduction of 1/2 of the amount when the

left dependant is one in number.

Counsel also submits that the Tribunal should have deducted

1/3rd amount as personal expenses of the deceased, hence the

Tribunal has committed an error in not doing so, hence the

interference of this Court is required and the compensation needs

suitable enhancement by this Court.

Heard learned counsel for the claimants-appellants and

perused the impugned judgment.

This fact is not in dispute that after the accident, instant

claim petition was submitted by two persons namely Chanky

Taneja and Smt. Jasvinder Kaur.

While deciding the claim petition the Tribunal concluded that

the claimant-appellant No.2 Smt. Jasvinder Kaur was daughter in

law of the deceased and she was not treated as dependant on

(3 of 3) [CMA-5964/2019]

deceased and under these facts and circumstances of the case,

only claimant-appellant No.1 Chanky Taneja was dependant on

deceased, so the Tribunal has not committed any error by

deducting1/2 amount as personal expenses of the deceased.

In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the

Court is not inclined to entertain the present appeal.

In view of the above, the appeal is hereby dismissed.

All pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) dismissed.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

Pravesh/57

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)