Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt.Patasi vs Jaswant Singh (2023:Rj-Jd:41819) on 2 December, 2023
[2023:RJ-JD:41819]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 653/2003
1. Smt. Patasi w/o Shri Banshilal, Aged 49 years,
2. Magh Raj S/o Shri Banshilal, Aged 14 years,
Residents of village Sawta Matoda, Teh. Osian, District
Jodhpur, appellant No.2 minor through his natural guardian
mother Smt. Patasi w/o Shri Banshilal appellant No.1
----Appellant
Versus
1. Jaswant Singh S/o Madho Singh, Resident of village Osian,
Distt. Jodhpur. (Driver of jeep No. RJ 19/T-1275)
2. Mohan Ram S/o Kesu Ram, Resident of village Jatipura, Teh.
Osian, District Jodhpur. (Owner of the jeep RJ 19/T-1275)
3. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Divisional Office-Residency
Road, Jodhpur through its Divisional Manager. (the insurer)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Suresh Joshi
For Respondent : Mr. Vishal Raj Mehta
No.3.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order
02/12/2023
1. The challenge in the present appeal is to the award dated
05.10.2002 passed learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(First), Jodhpur on the file of M.A.C. Case No.182/1998, wherein
and whereby the claim for compensation of the appellants for the
death of Banshilal was partly allowed granting a compensation of
Rs.3,89,500/- with interest.
2. The present appeal is filed by the claimants. The grievance
of the claimants is that the Tribunal has not considered the future
prospects in earning of the deceased. The deceased was Head
(Downloaded on 06/12/2023 at 08:45:26 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:41819] (2 of 4) [CMA-653/2003]
Peon in the Bank and he was having bright prospects of his
promotion. The Tribunal should have taken the professional
progress of the deceased and the amount ought to have been
granted under the head of future loss of earning. Their grievance
is also that the Tribunal has not adopted the appropriate multiplier
considering the age of the deceased as 50 years. The Tribunal
should have taken the multiplier of 13, whereas, the Tribunal has
adopted multiplier of 11, which is incorrect. The other grievance is
that the amounts granted under the conventional heads are also
on lower side.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company
justified the award of compensation passed by the Tribunal.
According to him, the compensations under the conventional
heads were fixed taking into consideration the law prevailing at
the relevant time. Therefore, such finding of the Tribunal does not
require interference at this stage.
4. The undisputed fact as made out from the evidence is that
the deceased was Head Peon working in the Bank of Baroda. His
monthly earning was Rs.3,942/- (rounded off Rs.4000/-) and such
employment was permanent employment. The principles laid
down by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co.
Ltd vs Pranay Sethi, reported in 2017 ACJ 2700, wherein the
deceased was permanent employee and was in the age group of
40-50, 30% of the actual earning shall be added towards loss of
future earnings. In the present case, the age of the deceased was
50 years and 30% shall be given addition to the actual monthly
earning of the deceased. 30% of the monthly income of Rs.4000/-
come to Rs.1200/-. Accordingly, the total monthly income comes
(Downloaded on 06/12/2023 at 08:45:26 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:41819] (3 of 4) [CMA-653/2003]
to Rs.4000 + 1200=Rs.5200/- and annual income of the deceased
is assessed as Rs.5200 X 12=Rs.62,400/-.
5. The deceased is survived by wife and son and the
appropriate deduction towards personal expenses is 1/3. The
Tribunal adopted the multiplier of 11 but looking to the fact that
deceased was aged 50 years, the appropriate multiplier is 13,
which is adopted in this case.
6. The Tribunal has granted Rs.10,000/- towards funeral
expenses to the claimants, which is on the lower side. As per the
principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Magma
General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram alias
Churu Ram, reported in 2018 LAW Suit (SC) 904, the claimants
are entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. The Tribunal
has granted Rs.2500/- only towards loss of estate. The claimants
are entitled for the compensation of Rs.15,000/- under this head.
The Tribunal has granted Rs.15000/- towards mental agony. The
consortium for each of the claimant shall be Rs. 40,000/- (total
compensation towards loss of consortium Rs.40,000 X 2 =
Rs.80,000/-). The amount granted under the head of mental
agony shall be adjusted towards the loss of consortium. Thus, the
re-computed amount of compensation works out as under:-
[Rs.62,400/- (annual income) - Rs.20,800/- (1/3 Personal
expenses)= Rs.41,600/- X 13 (multiplier) = 540,800/-]
Loss of dependency : Rs.5,40,800/-
Added: Loss of Consortium : Rs. 80,000/-
Added: Funeral Expenses : Rs. 15,000/-
Added. Loss of Estate : Rs. 15,000/-
-------------------
Total amount Rs.6,50,800/-
--------------------
[2023:RJ-JD:41819] (4 of 4) [CMA-653/2003]
7. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed enhancing the
compensation from Rs.3,89,500/- to Rs.6,50,800/-. The enhanced
amount shall carry an interest @ 7.5% from the date of petition
till its realization. The enhanced amount shall be deposited within
2 months from the date of this judgment.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J
9-AnilKC/NK
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
