Rajasthan High Court
Smt. Seema W/O Late Kamal Kumar vs Lalaram Sharma S/O Suwalal on 8 July, 2022
Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2639/2019
1. Smt. Seema W/o Late Kamal Kumar, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Village Jhadol, Police Station Borada, Present
Address, Ghoora Ghati, Jaipur Road, Ajmer (Raj)
2. Chitransh S/o Late Kamal Kumar, Aged About 4 Years,
Appellant No. 2 Through Natural Guardian Appellant No. 1
R/o Village Jhadol, Police Station Borada, Present
Address, Ghoora Ghati, Jaipur Road, Ajmer (Raj)
3. Sanwra S/o Ramkaran, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Village
Jhadol, Police Station Borada, Present Address, Ghoora
Ghati, Jaipur Road, Ajmer (Raj)
4. Smt. Shanti Devi W/o Sanwra, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
Village Jhadol, Police Station Borada, Present Address,
Ghoora Ghati, Jaipur Road, Ajmer (Raj)
----Appellants
Versus
1. Lalaram Sharma S/o Suwalal, R/o Chota Laamba,
Panchayat Samiti Through Aria, District Ajmer (Raj)
(Driver Of Trailor No. Rj-01-Gb-5009)
2. Shivraj S/o Ramchandra, R/o Moria Dungri, Shrinagar
Through Shrinagar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer
(Owner Of Vehicle)
3. National Insurance Company Ltd. Through Divisional
Manager, Divisional Office, Ajmer
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Aman Pareek for
Mr. Rajat Ranjan
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Judgment
08/07/2022
Instant appeal has been preferred by the claimants-
appellants assailing the impugned judgment and award dated
(2 of 3) [CMA-2639/2019]
12.02.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer,
Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in MAC Case
No.437/2017 whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants-
appellants has been allowed and a sum of Rs.11,54,970/- has
been awarded as compensation along with interest @ 9 per cent
per annum in favour of the claimants-appellants.
Learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the
evidence and after hearing counsel for the parties, decided the
claim petition of the appellants-claimants in favour of the
appellants as indicated above.
Counsel for the appellants submits that appellant No.3
Sanwra was the father of the deceased and he was dependent on
the earnings of the deceased but the Tribunal has not treated him
as dependent on the deceased. He further submits that under the
conventional heads, very meager amount has been awarded by
the Tribunal and not a single penny has been awarded for
transportation. He submits that under these circumstances, the
impugned judgment needs suitable enhancement by this Court.
I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the
judgment and perused the materials available on record.
Perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the family
ration card was produced on the record, which clearly shows that
the father of the deceased was residing separately from the
deceased at different residence. Hence, the Tribunal has not
committed any illegality by not treating him as dependent on the
deceased.
The Tribunal has granted a lump sum of Rs.70,000/- under
the conventional heads in the light of judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company
(3 of 3) [CMA-2639/2019]
Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors: (2017) 16 SCC 680. Hence,
the Tribunal has not committed any illegality while passing the
impugned award.
Quantum of compensation as assessed and awarded by the
Tribunal appears to be just and reasonable and the same cannot
be treated as inadequate.
Hence, there is no illegality or perversity in the findings
recorded by the Tribunal.
In the opinion of this court, the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal appears to be just and proper.
Hence, the appeal filed by the appellants-claimants is found
to be devoid of any merit and accordingly stands dismissed.
All pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
HEENA GANDHI /49
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
