Rajasthan High Court
Chandraprakash Bairwa S/O Amarlal ... vs Sanjay Kumar Meena S/O Ramsingh on 8 April, 2024
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
[2024:RJ-JP:16450]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1109/2022
1. Chandraprakash Bairwa S/o Amarlal Bairwa, Aged About
49 Years, R/o Behlavan, Tehsil- Atru, District- Baran
(Raj.) Presently Omprakash S/o Chandalal Bairwa Ka
Makan, Nareda Road, Baran, District-Baran (Raj).
2. Sugna Bai W/o Chandraprakash Bairwa, Aged About 47
Years, R/o Behlavan, Tehsil- Atru, District- Baran (Raj.)
Presently Omprakash S/o Chandalal Bairwa Ka Makan,
Nareda Road, Baran, District-Baran (Raj).
----Appellants
Versus
1. Sanjay Kumar Meena S/o Ramsingh, Aged About 50
Years, R/o Mandlyahedi, Tehsil Sangod, Police Thana-
Kanvas, Kota Rural, District Kota (Raj.). (Driver)
2. Heeralal Nagar S/o Ramkalyan Nagar, Aged About 41
Years, R/o Behlavan, Tehsil- Atru, District- Baran (Raj.).
(Owner)
3. Branch Manager, I.c.i.c.i. Lombard General Insurance
Company Limited, Registered Office - I.c.i.c.i. Lombard
House, 414, Veer Savarkar Marg, Siddi Vinayak Mandir Ke
Pass, Prabha Devi, Mumbai-400025.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singhal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Virendra Agarwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
DATE OF JUDGMENT 08/04/2024
The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 has been preferred by the claimants-appellants (for
short 'the claimants') dissatisfied with the judgment and award
dated 03.09.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Baran (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No.200/2017,
[2024:RJ-JP:16450] (2 of 4) [CMA-1109/2022]
whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.9,62,382/- along
with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim
petition as compensation in favour of the claimants.
Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Tribunal
has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.5,902/-
per month. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the
deceased was earning Rs. 18,000/- per month while working as an
accountant in the Manoj Concrete Crasher Raj Construction and
agricultural work. So, the income of the deceased be calculated as
Rs. 18,000/- per month. Alternatively, learned counsel for the
claimants further submits that the Tribunal has wrongly considered
the income of the deceased for 26 days only, whereas it should be
for 30 days. Learned counsel for the claimants further submits
that the Tribunal has awarded a very meagre lump sum amount of
Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium and love and affection,
whereas it should be Rs.40,000/- for each claimant. Learned
counsel for the claimants also submits that the Tribunal has
awarded Rs. 10,000/- under the head of loss of estate, whereas it
should be Rs. 15,000/-. So, the judgment and award of the
Tribunal may be modified.
Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has opposed the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimants
submitted that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the
deceased as Rs.5,902/- per month. So, appeal filed by the
claimants be dismissed.
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the claimants as well as learned counsel for the
Insurance Company.
[2024:RJ-JP:16450] (3 of 4) [CMA-1109/2022]
It is an admitted position that the claimants failed to adduce
any cogent evidence that the deceased was earning Rs.18,000/-
per month. The Tribunal although has considered the deceased as
skilled labour, but the Tribunal has wrongly considered the income
of the deceased for 26 days only, whereas it should be for 30
days. The Tribunal has awarded a very meagre lump sum amount
of Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium and love and affection,
whereas it should be Rs.40,000/- for each claimant. The Tribunal
has awarded amount of Rs. 10,000/- under the head of loss of
estate, whereas it should be Rs. 15,000/- instead of Rs.10,000/-
So, the judgment of the Tribunal is modified to the extent as
under:-
Monthly income 227X30= Rs.6,810/-
Annual Income 6,810 X12= Rs.81,720/-
According to the age of the 81,720 X18= Rs.14,70,960/-
deceased i.e. 22 years,
Multiplier 18 to be applied
Add 40% towards future 14,70,960+5,88,384=
prospects(+) Rs.20,59,344/-
Since, the deceased was an
unmarried boy, 1/2 income to 20,59,344-1029672=
be deducted for personal
Rs. 10,29,672/-
expenses of the deceased(-)
Loss of Consortium to claimant
No.1 and 2 (Rs.80,000/-) (+) Rs.80,000/-
Funeral expenses(+)
Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of Estate(+)
Rs. 15,000/-
Litigation Expenses(+)
Rs. 5,000/-
Total
Rs.11,44,672/-
Awarded amount
Rs.9,62,382/-
[2024:RJ-JP:16450] (4 of 4) [CMA-1109/2022]
Enhanced Amount
11,44,672-9,62,382=
Rs.1,82,290/-
In view of the above, the claimants are entitled to get a
further sum of Rs.1,82,290/- as compensation. Insurance
Company is directed to deposit enhanced amount of Rs.1,82,290/-
with the Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this order. On deposition of the said
amount, the claimants shall be entitled to withdrawn the same.
The enhanced amount shall carry 6% interest from the date of
filing of claim petition till the actual payment is made.
Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed.
Rest part of the impugned judgment shall remain
unchanged. Impugned judgment and award is modified
accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Tahir/219
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
