Rajasthan High Court

Vimal Chand And Another vs Mohammed Aslam And Others ... on 6 October, 2023

Bench: Ashutosh Kumar

[2023:RJ-JP:27303]

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

            S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2185/2014

1. Vimal Chand s/o Gokul, aged about 43 years
2. Smt.Manju w/o Vimal Chand, aged about 36 years
Resident of Mahendivas, Tehsil and District Tonk (Raj.)
                                                                       ----Appellants
                                       Versus
1. Mohammed Aslam s/o Jumma Shah, r/o Niwai Darwaja,
Purani Tonk, Tehsil and District Tonk (Raj.)
2. Ahmed s/o Nijamuddin, r/o Kali Paltan, Khatiyo Ka Gher,
District Tonk (Raj.)
3. Universal Sompo General Insurance Co.Ltd. Office at 201-208
Crystal Plaza, Behind Infinity Mall, Link Road, Andheri                           West,
Mumbai.
                                                                    ----Respondents

For Appellant(s)             :     Mr.Deepak Khandelwal
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr.Ritesh Jain with Mr.Ramdeo Arya &
                                   Ms.Poonam Mishra



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

                                        Order

06/10/2023

1. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants -

claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

against the judgment and award dated 08.10.2013 passed by

Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk, District Tonk

(hereinafter to be referred as "the Tribunal"), whereby learned

Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,45,560/- as compensation to the

claimants in Claim Petition 524/2011.

2. The claimants submitted a claim petition claiming compensation

of Rs.80,38,000/-. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the

learned Tribunal framed the issues and evaluated the evidence on

[2023:RJ-JP:27303] (2 of 6) [CMA-2185/2014]

record. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, decided the

claim petition of the claimants and passed the impugned judgment

and award. Hence, the present appeal.

3. Learned counsel for appellants-claimants submitted that

Mr.Pankaj Jain (hereinafter to be referred as "the deceased") was

of the age of 22 years at the time of accident and was working in

Shree Mansha Auto Mobiles on monthly salary basis, however,

learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed monthly income of the

deceased on the basis of daily wages of an unskilled labour.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants further submitted

that under the head of future prospects, only 30% amount has

been increased, which as per the judgment of the Apex Court in

the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay

Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 was to be

increased by 40%.

5. Learned counsel further submitted that under the head of

funeral charges and transportation charges, very meager amount

has been awarded by learned Tribunal, therefore, the appeal may

be allowed and award may be suitably enhanced.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent -

Insurance Company has supported the impugned judgment and

award and contended that learned Tribunal, after evaluating the

material, available on record, has rightly assessed the

compensation. Therefore, there is no merit in the present appeal,

hence, the same may be dismissed.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

[2023:RJ-JP:27303] (3 of 6) [CMA-2185/2014]

8. This Court finds that the deceased was said to be working in

Shree Mansha Auto Mobiles on a monthly salary of Rs.12,000/-

and in support of the said income, statement of AW -3 Tinu

Agrawal was recorded before the learned Tribunal to prove the

salary of the deceased, but it is an admitted position that neither

attendance register nor ledger account of the company has been

produced before the learned Tribunal in support of the fact that

the deceased was getting Rs.12,000/- as monthly salary from

Shree Mansha Auto Mobiles. However, only Exhibit - 17 has been

produced before learned Tribunal to prove that the deceased was

working with Shree Mansha Auto Mobiles and he got Rs.12,000/-

as salary for the month of April, 2011. Therefore, in the opinion

of this Court, learned Tribunal has rightly not relied upon the

salary certificate.

9. This Court finds that learned Tribunal has assessed income of

the deceased on the basis of minimum daily wages of an unskilled

labour. This Court also finds that the appellants-claimants have

produced evidence before the learned Tribunal to the effect that

the deceased (Mr.Pankaj Jain) was an educated person and he was

holding certificate of Computer Education, therefore, he cannot be

treated as unskilled person. There is force in the argument of

learned counsel for the appellants-claimants that the deceased

should be treated as skilled labour, therefore, this Court, while

treating the deceased as a skilled labour, assess daily income of

the deceased to be Rs.155 per day, which comes out to be

Rs.4,650/- per month.

10. This Court further finds that in view of the judgment of the

Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi & Ors. (supra), 40%

[2023:RJ-JP:27303] (4 of 6) [CMA-2185/2014]

amount is to be enhanced under the head of future prospects.

Thus, total monthly income of the deceased comes out to be

Rs.4,650 + 40% future prospects (Rs.1,860) = Rs.6,510/- per

month for the purpose of calculating the loss of income.

11. The deceased was unmarried at the time of accident,

therefore, under the head of personal expenses, 50% of the

amount is to be deducted. After such deduction, the net amount

comes to be Rs.3,255/- (Rs.6510-50% of Rs.6510).

12. The deceased was of 22 years at the time of his death, thus

multiplier of 18 is to be applied.

13. Accordingly, while applying the multiplier of 18, total amount

quantified as the loss of dependency comes out to be Rs.3255 x

12 x 18 = Rs.7,03,080/-.

14. The deceased, before death, remained in the hospital under

treatment. Thus, amount of Rs.1,46,360/- has also been awarded

by learned Tribunal under the head of medical expenses, for

which, the appellants-claimants are entitled for, hence, the same

does not warrant any interference by this Court.

15. Learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- under the head of

'filial' consortium. In view of the judgment in the case of Pranay

Sethi & Ors. (supra), each of the appellants-claimants are entitled

to get Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'filial' consortium.

16. Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- for funeral

expenses and Rs.2,000/- for transportation, which needs to be

enhanced to Rs.15,000/- in view of the judgment in the case of

Pranay Sethi & Ors. (supra).

[2023:RJ-JP:27303] (5 of 6) [CMA-2185/2014]

17. Learned Tribunal has not granted any amount under the head

of loss of estate, hence, Rs.15000/- is granted under the head of

loss of estate.

18. Accordingly, judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to

the extent as under:



  1.          Loss of Annual Income (as                    Rs.3255 x 12 x 18 =
              per   the  age      of   the                 Rs.7,03,080/-
              deceased, multiplier of 18).
  2.          Under the head of 'filial'                   Rs.40,000/- each to the
              Consortium                                   appellants-claimants
                                                           Total Rs.80,000/-
  3.          Funeral expenses                             Rs.15,000/-
  4.          Loss of estate                               Rs.15,000/-
  5.          Medical Expenses                              Rs.1,46,360/-
  6.          Total     amount                   of        Rs.9,59,440/-
              compensation
  7.          Less amount awarded by                       Rs.5,45,560/-
              the Tribunal
  8.          Enhanced     amount                of        (Rs.9,59,440-
              compensation                                 Rs.5,45,560=
                                                           Rs.4,13,880/-

19. In view of the above, the impugned judgment and award

dated 08.10.2013 passed by the learned Tribunal is modified to

the aforesaid extent. The claimants-appellants are entitled to get

a sum of Rs.9,59,440/- as compensation. Insurance Company is

directed to deposit enhanced amount of compensation with the

Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of

certified copy of this order. After deposition of the said amount,

the learned Tribunal is directed to disburse the same in terms of

the award. The enhanced amount shall carry 8% interest from the

date of filing of claim petition till the actual payment is made.

[2023:RJ-JP:27303] (6 of 6) [CMA-2185/2014]

20. The other terms and conditions of the impugned judgment