Rajasthan High Court
Urmila Devi W/O Late Shri Shankar Das ... vs Arvind Bhai S/O Shri Khoda Bhai on 8 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. 1744/2019
1. Urmila Devi W/o Late Shri Shankar Das Swami, Aged
About 39 Years, Resident Of Badijodi, Tehsil Shahpura,
District Jaipur (Raj)
2. Ramsharan S/o Late Shri Shankar Das, Aged About 22
Years, Resident Of Badijodi, Tehsil Shahpura, District
Jaipur (Raj)
3. Kumari Guddi Swami D/o Late Shri Shankardas, Aged
About 21 Years, Resident Of Badijodi, Tehsil Shahpura,
District Jaipur (Raj)
----Appellants
Versus
1. Arvind Bhai S/o Shri Khoda Bhai, Resident Bakrol, District
Anand Gujrat (Driver)
2. Harshad Bahi S/o Chandrakant Bhai, Through Power Of
Attorney Iliyas Bhai, S/o Shri Rasul Bhai, Resident
Sojitara, District Anand Gujrat (Owner)
3. United India Insurance Company Limited, D.o. 2Nd
Transport Nagar, Jaipur (Insurance Company)
4. Sedudas S/o Laxman Das Swami, Aged About 60 Years,
Resident Of Badijodi, Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur
(Rajasthan)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, Adv. with
Mr. Inderjeet Deora, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
Date Of Judgment 08/04/2024
1. 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
(2 of 4) [CMA-1744/2019]
dated 15.12.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Shahpura, District Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case
No.43/2000(NCV No.43/2000), whereby the Tribunal has awarded
a sum of Rs.4,70,982/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from
the date of filing the claim petition as compensation in favour of
the claimants.
2. The Tribunal on the basis of the pleading of the parties,
framed the issues and evaluated the evidence on record. After
hearing counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition of the
claimants and awarded the amount as indicated above.
3. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Tribunal
has wrongly considered the income of the deceased-Shankardas
Swami as Rs.1,768/- per month (Rs. 68/- per day). Learned
counsel for the claimants further submits that the deceased was a
driver and earning Rs.9,250/- per month. So, income of the
deceased be considered as Rs.9,250/- per month. Learned counsel
for the claimants further submits that the Tribunal has wrongly
calculated the income of deceased for 26 days, whereas, it should
be for 30 days. Learned counsel for the claimants further submits
that the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards future
prospects, whereas, as per age of the deceased i.e. 23 years, it
should be 40% of the income of the deceased. The Tribunal has
wrongly awarded lump sum amount of Rs. 40,000/- towards loss
of consortium and love & affection, whereas it should be Rs.
40,000/- to each claimant. So, judgment and award of the
Tribunal may be modified.
4. Learned counsel for the insurance company has opposed the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimants and
(3 of 4) [CMA-1744/2019]
submitted that the claimants failed to adduce any cogent evidence
that the deceased was earning Rs.9,250/- per month. The Tribunal
has rightly calculated the income of the deceased on the basis of
minimum wages prevalent at the relevant point of time i.e.
Rs.68/- per day. So, the appeal filed by the claimants be
dismissed.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the claimants as well as learned counsel for the
respondent-Insurance Company.
6. It is an admitted position that the claimants failed to adduce
any cogent evidence that the deceased was earning Rs.9,250/-
per month. So, the Tribunal has rightly calculated the income of
the deceased on the basis of minimum wages prevalent at the
relevant point of time i.e. Rs.68/- per day 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 not awarded
any amount towards future prospects, whereas it should be 40%
of the deceased's income. The Tribunal has awarded lump sum
amount of Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium and love &
affection, whereas it should be Rs. 40,000/- to each claimant. So,
the judgment of the Tribunal is modified to the extent as under:-
Monthly income 68X30 =Rs.2,040/-
Annual Income 2040X12= Rs.24,480/-
According to the age of the 24,480X18=Rs.4,40,640/-
deceased i.e. 23 years,
Multiplier 18 to be applied
1/4 is to be deducted for 4,40,640-1,10,160= Rs.
personal expenses of the 3,30,480/-
deceased
Add 40% towards future 3,30,480+1,32,192=
(4 of 4) [CMA-1744/2019]
prospects Rs.4,62,672 /-
Loss of consortium to claimant Rs.1,60,000/-
No.1 Rs.40,000/- and loss of
Love and Affection to the
claimants (40,000X 3=Rs.
1,20,000/-)
Loss of Estate(+) Rs.15,000/-
Funeral Expenses(+) Rs.15,000/-
Total
Rs.6,52,672/-
Less amount awarded by the
Tribunal Rs.4,70,982/-
Enhanced Amount of
compensation 6,52,672-4,70,982=Rs.
1,81,690/-
7. In view of the above, the claimants are entitled to get a
further sum of Rs.1,81,690/- as compensation. The Insurance
Company is directed to deposit enhanced amount of Rs.
Rs.1,81,690/- (6,52,672-4,70,982) 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 @ 9% interest per annum from the date of filing of claim
petition till the actual payment is made.
8. Rest part of the impugned judgment shall remain
unchanged. Impugned judgment and award is modified
accordingly.
9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed.
10. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Gourav/49
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
