Rajasthan High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Savitri Devi W/O Late Sh. Sita Ram on 5 April, 2024
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 259/2020
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Through Branch Manager,
Branch Office Near Poonam Talkies, Lalshot Road, Jaipur Having
Its Regional Office At Nehru Place, Tonk Road, Jaipur Through Its
Constituted Attorney.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Smt. Savitri Devi W/o Late Sh. Sita Ram, Aged About 51
Years, R/o Kableshwar, Tehsil And District Dausa, (Raj.)
2. Lokesh S/o Late Sh. Sita Ram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Kableshwar, Tehsil And District Dausa, (Raj.)
3. Anoop S/o Late Sh. Sita Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Kableshwar, Tehsil And District Dausa, (Raj.)
4. Smt. Prabhati Devi W/o Aniram, Aged About 73 Years,
R/o Kableshwar, Tehsil And District Dausa, (Raj.)
Respondents-Claimants
5. Sanjay Singh S/o Sh. Pyare Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Pathroula Khurd, Police Station Rajakheda, District
Dholpur (Raj.) (Driver Of Vehicle)
6. Rajveer Singh S/o Sh. Hakeem Singh, R/o Gher Nagar,
Rajakheda, Dholpur (Raj.) (Owner Of Vehicle)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rishipal Agarwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kapil Sharma, Adv. for
Mr. Sandeep Mathur, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
Date Of Judgment 05/04/2024
The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle
Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellant-non-claimant-The
New India Assurance Company Limited (for short 'the Assurance
Company') against the judgment and award dated 17.09.2019
(2 of 4) [CMA-259/2020]
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dausa (for short
'the Tribunal') in claim case No.31/2016, whereby the claim
petition filed by the respondents claimants Nos.1 to 4 (for short
'the claimants') has been partly allowed and the Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.31,19,816/- along with interest @ 7% per
annum from the date of filing the claim petition in their favour and
against the respondents-non-claimants (for short 'the non-
claimants') jointly and severally.
Learned counsel for the Assurance Company submits that the
Tribunal has erred in not deducting Rs.1,450/- per month being
paid against house rent to the deceased. Learned counsel for the
Assurance Company further submits that house rent is required to
be deducted from the gross income of the deceased. Learned
counsel for the Assurance Company also submits that the Tribunal
has erred in not applying the split multiplier overlooking the fact
that the deceased was to retire after 6 years. So amount be
calculated as per the split multiplier. Learned counsel for the
Assurance Company also submits that previously vide judgment
and award dated 23.06.2017, the Tribunal fastened the liability to
pay the amount of compensation on non-claimant Nos.5 and 6 as
Claim petition filed by the claimants was decided against the
respondent Nos.5 and 6 and at that time, the Assurance Company
was not a party in the claim petition. The respondent No.6-Rajveer
Singh filed S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.2185/2019 before this court
and this court vide order dated 04.02.2019 decided the writ
petition and set-aside the order dated 02.05.2016, whereby ex-
parte proceedings were drawn against the respondent Nos.5 and 6
as also the order dated 08.10.2018 rejecting the respondent
(3 of 4) [CMA-259/2020]
Nos.5 and 6's application, directed the claimant to implead the
Assurance Company as a party in the claim petition and the
Tribunal was expected to decide the matter expeditiously. So, the
Assurance Company can not be held liable to pay interest from the
date of filing the claim petition i.e. 11.12.2015. So, the judgment
and award dated 17.09.2019 be modified accordingly.
Learned counsel for the claimants has opposed the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the Assurance
Company and submitted that the judgment and award dated
17.09.2019 passed by the Tribunal does not require any
interference. So, the appeal filed by the Assurance Company be
dismissed.
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the Assurance company as well as learned counsel for
the claimants.
The Tribunal while calculating the income of the deceased,
has taken into consideration the salary certificate(Ex-17). So, in
my considered opinion, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the
income of the deceased as Rs.34,657/- per month after deducting
the income tax. So, no interference is required for re-assessing
the deceased's income. The Tribunal has rightly included house
rent allowance (HRA) in the deceased's income but the Tribunal
has wrongly fastened the liability on the Assurance Company to
pay interest to the claimants from the date of filing the claim
petition i.e. 11.12.2015. At the time, when the judgment and
award dated 23.06.2017 was passed, the Assurance Company was
not a party but it was impleaded as a party respondent thereafter
as per direction of this court vide order dated 04.02.2019 in S. B.
(4 of 4) [CMA-259/2020]
Civil Writ Petition No.2185/2019. So, the Assurance Company is
liable to pay the interest after being impleaded as a party in the
claim petition. So, the judgment and award dated 17.09.2019
passed by the Tribunal is required to be modified accordingly.
Accordingly, the Assurance Company is directed to pay
interest @ 7% as per the judgment and award dated 17.09.2019
from the date when it was impleaded as a party respondent and
not from the date of filing the claim petition i.e. 11.12.2015.
Impugned judgment is modified as indicated above. Rest
part of the impugned judgment shall remain unchanged.
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Gourav/299
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
