Rajasthan High Court
Moti Lal And Another vs Iklakh And Others on 24 May, 2022
Bench: Anoop Kumar V.J.)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3214/2011
1. Motilal S/o Shri Godu, R/o Vill. Bawal, Thana Peelwa,
Distt. Nagaur, Presently R/o Deewan Ka Bhatta,
Kharekhadi, Ajmer
2. Smt. Kaushalya W/o Shri Motilal, Meghwal, R/o Vill.
Bawal, Thana Peelwa, Distt. Nagaur, Presently R/o
Deewan Ka Bhatta, Kharekhadi, Ajmer
----Appellants
Versus
1. Ikhlakh S/o Shri Jahur Hussain, R/o Vill. Khanpura, Ajmer
Driver Of Motorcycle No. RJ-01-SK-4905
2. Sokit S/o Shri Mitthu, R/o Rail Ki Dhang, Kharekhadi,
Christianganj, Ajmer Owner Of Motorcycle No. RJ-01-SK-
4905
3. United India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Manager,
24, Whites Road, Chennai Through Divisional Manager,
Lohagal Road, Shastri Nagar, Ajmer
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anurag Mathur
Mr. Chetan Sharma
For Respondent(s) : None present
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Judgment
24/05/2022
Instant appeal has been preferred by the claimants-
appellants against the judgment and award dated 05.01.2011
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Tribunal'), by which the claim petition filed by
the claimants-appellants was allowed and the Insurance Company
was directed to pay a lump sum compensation of Rs.1,80,000/-.
(2 of 3) [CMA-3214/2011]
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the age of
the deceased daughter of the claimants-appellants was 11 years,
but the Tribunal has determined the age of the deceased as 10
years on the basis of the judgment of this Court in the case of
Kailash Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Reported in RLR
2009 312 and awarded a lump sum compensation of
Rs.1,80,000/-. He further submits that recently the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali Vs.
Shyam Kishore Murmu reported in (2021) 4 CPR 436 has
granted compensation of Rs.4,70,000/-, where the age of the
deceased child was 7 years only. So, the matter requires
reconsideration and the amount be suitably enhanced.
None is there to oppose the prayer made by counsel for the
appellants.
Heard. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the
appellants.
Perusal of the record indicates that in the claim petition, the
age of the deceased child Pooja has been mentioned as 11 years,
but in the post mortem report, her age was mentioned as 10
years, while in her hospital records, her age was mentioned as 7
years. No specific document with regard to her exact age was
placed on record. So, on the basis of her post mortem report, her
age was determined as 10 years and looking to her age a lump
sum amount of compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- has been awarded
by the Tribunal.
The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr.
Vs. Lala & Ors. reported in MACD 2013 (SC) 289 has fixed a
lump sum amount in the cases of child death e.g. (a) between the
age group of 0-5 years -Rs.2.5 lacs, (b) 5-10 years-Rs.3 lacs and
(3 of 3) [CMA-3214/2011]
(c) between 10-15 years -Rs. 5 lacs and on the basis of the
aforesaid judgment, revised guidelines was issued by the
Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority (for short RALSA') for
settlement of MACT Cases. On the basis of RALSA guidelines, co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Manju Devi Vs.
Biram Dev in SB Civl Misc. Appeal No.1725/2018 has granted
a lump sum amount of Rs.3,50,000/- for death of a child, falls in
the age group of 5-10 years.
Admittedly, the in present case also, the age of the deceased
child was 10 years at the time of accident, therefore, amount of
compensation in the present case is enhanced from Rs.1,80,000/-
to Rs.3,50,000/-.
In view of the discussions made above, the present appeal is
partly allowed. The Insurance Company is directed to pay
enhanced amount of Rs.1,70,000/- in addition to the amount
already awarded to the claimants-appellants within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The
enhanced amount shall carry interest @6% per annum from the
date of filing the claim petition.
Hence, the appeal stands disposed of in above terms.
All pending applications stand disposed of.
Record of the Tribunal be sent back forthwith.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
HEENA GANDHI /12
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
