Rajasthan High Court

Radha Bai And Ors vs Raghunath And Ors ... on 7 October, 2023

Bench: Ashutosh Kumar

[2023:RJ-JP:27668]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

             S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 668/2017

1.       Radha Bai aged about 24 years, W/o Mahesh Sahriya, R/o
         Mamoni, Tehsil Shahbad, District Baran Raj.
2.       Gyani Chand aged about 49 years, S/o Dojya Sahriya, R/o
         Mamoni, Tehsil Shahbad, District Baran Raj.
3.       Smt. Lila Bai W/o aged about 47 years Gyani Chand
         Sahriya, R/o Mamoni, Tehsil Shahbad, District Baran Raj.
                                                     ----Appellants/Claimants
                                    Versus
1.       Raghunath aged about 47 years, S/o Jagannath, R/o
         Gram-Dhikoniya, Tehsil Kishangarh, District Baran Raj.
         [Driver]
2.       Gopal Singh aged about 41 years S/o Amar Singh, R/o
         Amba Colony, Madanganj- Kishangarh, District Ajmer Raj.
         [Owner]
3.       Arvind Mehta aged about 34 years S/o Ramdayal Mehta,
         R/o Gram Mamni, Tehsil Shahbad, District Baran Raj.
         [Owner]
4.       Iffco Tokiyo General Insurance Company Limited, Branch
         Office-C-16, Vaishali Nagar, Annasagar Road, Ajmer Raj.
         [Insurance Company]
                                           ----Respondents/Non-claimants

For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. Sanjay Singhal
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Chanderdeep Singh Jodha
                                (for Insurance Company)



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

                                     Order

07/10/2023

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

under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the

judgment and award dated 25.02.2016 passed by Judge, Motor

[2023:RJ-JP:27668] (2 of 6) [CMA-668/2017]

Accident Claims Tribunal, Baran (hereinafter referred to as the

'Tribunal') in MAC Case No.31/2012, whereby the learned Tribunal

awarded a sum of Rs.7,23,000/- to the claimants-appellants.

2. The claimants-appellants filed the claim petition claiming

compensation of Rs.36,83,000/-. On the basis of pleadings of the

parties, the learned Tribunal framed the issues and evaluated the

evidence on record. After hearing learned counsel for the parties,

learned Tribunal while deciding the claim petition, awarded the

aforesaid amount as compensation in favour of the claimants-

appellants.

3. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dated

25.02.2016, the claimants-appellants filed this miscellaneous

appeal for suitable enhancement of the amount awarded as

compensation by learned Tribunal.

4. Brief facts of this case are that on 22.11.2011, one Mahesh

was travelling as Khalasi in a Matador bearing registration No. RJ-

37-GA-0059 when the driver of the aforesaid Matador drove it in a

rash and negligent manner and resultantly, the vehicle collided

with the divider due to which, Mahesh sustained grievous injuries

and subsequently, died.

5. Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants contended that

the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and

award, has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased

as Rs.4,500/- on the date of accident. The respondent-Insurance

Company has not challenged this finding of learned Tribunal.

[2023:RJ-JP:27668] (3 of 6) [CMA-668/2017]

6. Learned counsel further contended that the learned Tribunal

has erred in not awarding any amount under the head of future

prospects, as the deceased was 22 years of age at time of

accident and, therefore, the claimants-appellants are entitled for

40% future prospects.

7. Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants submitted that

under other conventional heads also, a meagre amount has been

awarded to the claimants-appellants and therefore, the appeal

may be allowed and the impugned judgment and award may be

suitably enhanced in favour of the claimants-appellants.

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

Insurance Company submitted that learned Tribunal has rightly

passed the impugned judgment and award and contended that

there is no merit in this appeal and the same be dismissed.

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

10. Learned Tribunal in the impugned judgment has observed

that no evidence was produced to prove that the deceased, by

doing Khalasi work was earning Rs.7,500/- per month at the time

of accident. Therefore, in the opinion of this Court learned Tribunal

has rightly assessed the monthly income of the deceased as

Rs.4,500/-.

11. Learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the

head of future prospects. This Court finds that the deceased was

22 years of age at time of accident and therefore, increment of

40% as to the future prospects, as per the direction given by the

[2023:RJ-JP:27668] (4 of 6) [CMA-668/2017]

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance

Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017)

16 SCC 680 is to be made. Thus, total monthly income of the

deceased comes out to be Rs.4,500/- + 40% (Rs.1,800/-) future

prospects = Rs.6,300/- per month.

12. It is an admitted fact that the deceased is survived by his

wife and parents. Therefore, 1/3 part of the income of the

deceased is to be deducted under the head of personal expenses.

After such deduction, the net income of the deceased comes out

to be Rs.6,300/- divided by 3 = Rs.2,100/- and total Rs.6,300 -

2,100 = Rs.4,200/- per month.

13. The age of the deceased was 22 years at the time of

accident, thus as per the judgment of Pranay Sethi (supra) the

multiplier of 18 is applicable in this case. Now, applying the

multiplier of 18, total amount quantified loss of dependency comes

out to be Rs.4,200/- X 12 X 18 = Rs.9,07,200/-.

14. Learned Tribunal has awarded a lump sum amount of

Rs.50,000/- under the head of loss of love and affection to the

claimants-appellants. As per the judgment passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra), United

India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur @

Satvinder Kaur & Anr. reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780 and

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru

Ram & Ors reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, the appellant No.1-

wife of the deceased is entitled to get Rs.40,000/- under the head

of spousal consortium, appellant Nos.2 and 3, who are parents of

[2023:RJ-JP:27668] (5 of 6) [CMA-668/2017]

the deceased are entitled to get Rs.40,000/- each under the head

of filial consortium.

15. Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- for

funeral expenses, however, as per the judgment of Pranay Sethi

(supra), it needs to be Rs.15,000/-.

16. Learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the

head of loss of estate whereas, according to the judgment of

Pranay Sethi (supra), Rs.15,000/- is required to be granted

under the head of loss of estate.

17. So, judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the

extent as under:



  1.    Loss of Annual Income (as per                     Rs.4,200/- x 12 x 18 =
        the   age     of   the deceased,                      Rs.9,07,200/-
        multiplier of 18).
  2.    Under the head of Spousal                               Rs.40,000/-
        Consortium, Parental Consortium                     (to each appellants)
        and Filial Consortium                              = Total Rs.1,20,000/-
  3.    Funeral expenses                                             Rs.15,000/-
  4.    Loss of estate                                               Rs.15,000/-
  5.    Total amount of compensation                           Rs.10,57,200/-
  6.    Less amount        awarded        by    the              Rs.7,23,000/-
        Tribunal
  7.    Enhanced             amount                 of       (Rs.10,57,200/- -
        compensation                                          Rs.7,23,000/-) =
                                                               Rs.3,34,200/-

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

dated 25.02.2016 passed by the Tribunal is modified to the

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

sum of Rs.10,57,200/- 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

[2023:RJ-JP:27668] (6 of 6) [CMA-668/2017]

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.

19. The other terms and conditions of the impugned judgment