Rajasthan High Court
Nand Kishor Pareekh S/O Makkhan ... vs Mohammad Raes Kaji S/O Rustom Kaji on 28 June, 2022
Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4914/2019
1. Nand Kishor Pareekh S/o Makkhan Lal, Aged About 54
Years, Resident Of Ward No. 16 Fatehpuri Ke Bahar Near
To Lal Masjid, Sikar Tehsil District Sikar (Raj)
2. Kiran Devi W/o Nand Kishor Pareekh, Aged About 50
Years, Resident Of Ward No. 16 Fatehpuri Ke Bahar Near
To Lal Masjid, Sikar Tehsil District Sikar (Raj)
3. Radhika D/o Vikas Pareekh, Aged About 9 Years, (Minor
Represented Through Her Natural Guardian Grandmother
Kiran Devi), Resident Of Ward No. 16 Fatehpuri Ke Bahar
Near To Lal Masjid, Sikar Tehsil District Sikar (Raj)
----Appellants
Versus
1. Mohammad Raes Kaji S/o Rustom Kaji, Resident Of
Ganedi Tehsil Laxmangarh District Sikar (Raj) (Driver
Vehicle Innova Number Rj18Ua 0368)
2. Aslam Rana S/o Shankar Lal, Resident Of Ganedi Tehsil
Laxmangarh District Sikar (Raj) (Owner Vehicle Innova
Number Rj18Ua 0368)
3. United India Insurance Through Its Branch Manager, Kali,
Devipura, Jaipur Road, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar
(Insurance Company Vehicle Innova Numbr Rj 18 Ua
0368)
4. Mohammad Ismail S/o Mustaq Ahmed, Resident Ward No.
10, Near Islamia School, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar
(Insurered Owner Of The Vehicle Innova Number Rj 18 Ua
0368)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prabhansh Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
28/06/2022
(2 of 3) [CMA-4914/2019]
Instant appeal has been preferred by the claimants-
appellants against the judgment and award dated 03.06.2019
passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar,
Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in MAC Case
No.782/2015 whereby an amount of Rs. 9,47,867/- has been
awarded as compensation in favour the claimants-appellants.
Counsel for the appellant submits that the age of the
deceased was 29 years, but the Tribunal has determined the age
of the deceased as 33 years. He further submits that under the
head of conventional heads, a meager amount of Rs.30,000/- only
has been awarded, so, the award needs suitable enhancement. He
further submits that the deceased was a daily wager and his
income has been determined for 26 days while his income should
have been determined for 30 days.
Heard. Considered the arguments raised by counsel for the
appellant and perused the impugned award and the documents
available on record.
There is no force in the arguments raised by counsel for the
appellants that the age of the deceased was 29 years. No
documentary evidence was produced on the record of the Tribunal
with regard to the age of the deceased. Looking to post mortem
report Ex.-11 of the deceased, the age of the deceased was
treated as 33 years as the same was mentioned in the post
mortem report.
There is no force in the argument raised by counsel for the
appellants that under other heads, very meager amount has been
awarded because under the conventional heads a sum of
Rs.30,000/- has been awarded and the income of the deceased
was determined on the basis of 26 working days in a month.
(3 of 3) [CMA-4914/2019]
Bare perusal of the impugned award clearly indicates that
the award has already been passed on a higher side, which does
not require any further interference by this Court. The Tribunal has
applied all applicable formulas including grant of 40% future
prospects to the dependants of the deceased in the light of the
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in AIR
2017 SC 5157.
Hence, there is no force in this appeal and the same is
hereby dismissed.
All pending applications, if any stand dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
HEENA GANDHI/63
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
