Jagdish Prasad Yadav S/O Shri ... vs Shriram General Insurance ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4655 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

         S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1463/2022

1.     Jagdish Prasad Yadav S/o Shri Hanuman, Aged About 51
       Years,
2.     Smt. Bimla Devi W/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Yadav, Aged
       About 49 Years,
       Both R/o Naharwadi Tan Chapoli Tehsil Udaipurwati
       District Jhunjhunu, Presently Residing At Prahad Yadav
       S/o Shri Saiduram R/o Ghasi Ka Dehar Nangal Tehsil
       Shrimadhopur, District Sikar (Raj.).
                                                     ----Appellants/Claimants
                                    Versus
1.     Shriram     General       Insurance         Company        Ltd.,   Through
       Manager Divisional Office E-8, EPIP, RIICO Industrial Area
       Sitapura Jaipur.
       (Insurance Company Vehicle New Motorcycle Santro
       Mahindra       And        Mahindra          Company         Chesis       No.
       MCDKG1B14F1G29253 Engine No. UPEFGO17215)
2.     Gajendra Kumar S/o Shri Baluram, Aged About 26 Years,
       R/o    Kishanpura       Police     Station       Ranoli    District    Sikar.
       (Registered      Owner        Vehicle       New       Motorcycle      Santro
       Mahindra       And        Mahindra          Company         Chesis       No.
       MCDKG1B14F1G29253 Engine No. UPEFGO17215)
3.     Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Harphool Singh, R/o Kishanpura
       Police Station Ranoli District Sikar.
       (Vehicle Driver New Motorcycle Santro Mahindra And
       Mahindra Company Chechis No. MCDKG1B14F1G29253
       Engine No. UPEFO17215)
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Akshat Choudhary, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA Judgment

08/07/2022

(2 of 3) [CMA-1463/2022]

This Civil Misc. Appeal has been flied by the appellants-

claimants (for short, 'the claimants') against the judgment dated

19.4.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Shrimadhopur, District Sikar (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby

the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 13,38,081/- as

compensation in their favour.

Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the

amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is abysmally

low. He further submits that part amount has been awarded by

the Tribunal in lieu of the medical bills. The amount awarded by

the Tribunal under the head of consortium is also at lower side.

Hence, the impugned judgment and award needs to be modified.

Heard. Considered.

As per the marks sheet of the deceased Amit Kumar,

issued by Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, his date of

birth was 4.12.1996 and the accident took place on 22.1.2016. In

this way, as on the date of accident, he was about 20 years of

age. Since no document was produced with regard to income of

the deceased, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at

Rs. 6030/- per month (Rs. 201 X 30), whereas when specific

amount of Rs. 5226/- per month was fixed by the State

Government as minimum wages for unskilled labour, that should

have been taken into consideration while assessing the income of

the deceased. Thus, the income of the deceased is assessed at Rs.

5226/- per month instead of Rs. 6030/- per month, which comes

to Rs. Rs. 62,712/- per annum (Rs. 5226 X 12).

In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

National Insurance Company Limited Va. Pranay Sethi &

Ors. reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, 40% of the income was

(3 of 3) [CMA-1463/2022]

added towards future prospects of the deceased. Thus the amount

is calculated thus:

Rs. 62,712 + Rs. 25,085 = Rs. 87,797

Since the deceased was about 20 years of age at the

time of accident, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 18 and

deceased being a bachelor, rightly deduced 1/2 amount towards

the personal expenses of the deceased and calculated the amount

thus:

87,797 X 18 = Rs. 15,80,346/-

Rs. 15,80,364 X 1/2 = Rs. 7,90,173/-

In addition to the above and in view of the judgment

passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi

(supra), the claimants would be entitled to receive Rs. 70,000/-

towards conventional heads. The Tribunal has also awarded Rs.

3,70,345/- towards the expenses incurred on the treatment of the

deceased, which includes the amount of medical bills. Thus, the

amount receivable by the claimants is Rs. 12,30,518/-, whereas

the Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 13,38,081/- as

compensation.

For the aforesaid reasons, I find no force in this appeal

and the same being bereft of any merit is liable to be dismissed,

which stands dismissed accordingly.

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

DK/22

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)