Rajasthan High Court
Shankarlal S/O Mangalchand vs Manoj Kumar S/O Chandaram @ Ramchandra on 3 April, 2024
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
[2024:RJ-JP:15422]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1365/2023
Shankarlal S/o Mangalchand, Aged About 69 Years, R/o Shankar
Colony, Shahpura, Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur, Raj.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Manoj Kumar S/o Chandaram @ Ramchandra, R/o
Biyawas, Tehsil Virat Nagar, District Jaipur, Raj.( (Driver
Of Vehicle Pick-Up No. Rj-14-Gb-7475).
2. Jairam Gurjar S/o Mahadev, R/o Bhojpura @ Lakhawala,
Tehsl Virat Nagar, District Jaipur, Raj. (Registered Owner
Of Pick-Up No. Rj-14-Gb-7475).
3. Magma H.d.i. General Insurance Company Limited,
Through Manager, Office Third Floor Prestial Tower, E-1,
Amrapali Road, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur-302021, Raj.
(Insurance Company Of Pick-Up No. Rj-14-Gb-7475).
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Virendra Agarwal, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
DATE OF JUDGMENT 03/04/2024
The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 has been preferred by the claimant-appellant (for short
'the claimant') dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated
19.10.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge No.2 and
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Shahpura, Jaipur (for short 'the
Tribunal') in Claim Case No.186/2021, (NCV No.130/2019)
whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.55,658/- along
with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the claim
petition as compensation in favour of the claimant.
[2024:RJ-JP:15422] (2 of 3) [CMA-1365/2023]
Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the Tribunal
has committed an error in not awarding any amount under the
head of future prospects. Learned counsel for the claimant also
submits that due to accident, the claimant suffered 25.19%
permanent disability but the Tribunal has not granted any
compensation by adopting the multiplier method. So, the
judgment and award of the Tribunal may be modified.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has
opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the
claimant and submitted that accident occurred on 17.02.2019 and
claimant stood retired from the post of Assistant Sub Inspector,
Rajasthan Police on 31.05.2014. At the time of accident, he was
getting pension from Police Department. The claimant also
admitted the fact that due to accident, his monthly pension was
not effected in any manner. Rather, after the date of accident his
pension was enhanced substantially. So, the Tribunal has rightly
came to conclusion that no loss of income was caused to the
claimant. So, judgment of the Tribunal is as per the law. So,
appeal be dismissed.
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the claimant as well as learned counsel for the
Insurance Company.
It is an admitted position that the claimant stood retired
from Police Department on 31.05.2014 and the accident occurred
on 17.02.2019. As per statement of the claimant, after the date of
accident he was getting more pension. So no loss of income was
caused to the claimant. In my considered opinion, the Tribunal
rightly came to the conclusion that claimant did not suffer any
[2024:RJ-JP:15422] (3 of 3) [CMA-1365/2023]
future loss of income on account of accident. Taking into
consideration the incapacity of the claimant to discharge his daily
routine work in future, the Tribunal rightly awarded a lumpsum
amount of Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the claimant for a fracture in
his right leg and a fracture in his right hand. So, the appeal filed
by the claimant being devoid of merit, is liable be dismissed,
which stand dismissed accordingly.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Tahir/49
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
