Rajasthan High Court
Smt Sampat Kanwar vs Bhanwar Singh And Ors on 20 March, 2024
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
[2024:RJ-JP:13796]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2947/2007
1. Smt Sampat Kanwar aged 35 years, widow of Bhadar Singh @
Bahadur Singh
2. Sardar Singh S/o Bhadar Singh @ Bahadur Singh
3. Chander Kala, aged 16 years
4. Sharvan Singh, aged 12 years
5. Surendra Singh aged 10 years
Daughter and Son of Bhadar Singh @ Bahadur Singh
All Resident of Chudoli, Police Station Sadar, Sikar, Distt. Sikar
----Appellant
Versus
1. Bhanwar Singh S/o Prahlad Singh Jodha, Resident of 350 New
B.J.S. Colony, Jodhpur (Driver of Bus No.RJ 19 P 6818)
2. Rajasthan State Roadways Transport Corporation through
Chairman, Chomu House, Jaipur (Registered owner of Bus No.RJ
19 P 6818)
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Tanmay Dhand, Adv. for claimants
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rakesh Dhankar, Adv. for RSRTC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
DATE OF JUDGMENT 20/03/2024
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 19.03.2007 passed by the Additional District & Sessions
Judge (Fast Track) No.1-cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar
(for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No.358/2005, whereby the
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,76,000/- as compensation
and Rs.1000/- has been awarded as Litigation Expenses along
[2024:RJ-JP:13796] (2 of 4) [CMA-2947/2007]
with interest @ 6.25% per annum from the date of filing the claim
petition i.e. w.e.f. 11.03.2004 as compensation in favour of the
claimants.
Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Tribunal
wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.2500/- per
month. Deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. So, income
of the deceased be calculated as Rs.10,000/- per month. Learned
counsel for the claimants also submits that the Tribunal wrongly
deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses. As per the
dependency, it should be 1/4th of the deceased's income. Learned
counsel for the claimants also submits that the Tribunal had not
awarded any amount towards future prospects. As per the age of
the deceased, it should be 40% of the deceased's income. Learned
counsel for the claimants also submits that the Tribunal awarded a
very meager amount of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium to
claimant No.1, Rs.40,000/- (Rs.10,000/- each to claimant Nos. 2
to 5) towards love and affection, whereas it should be Rs.
40,000/- for each claimant. Learned counsel for the claimants also
submits that the Tribunal awarded a very meager amount of
Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses, whereas it should be
Rs.15,000/-. So, judgment and award of the Tribunal be modified
accordingly.
Learned counsel for the RSRTC has opposed the arguments
advanced by learned counsel for the claimants and submitted that
the Tribunal rightly assessed the income of the deceased as
Rs.2500/- per month because there was no cogent evidence that
deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. So, appeal be
dismissed.
[2024:RJ-JP:13796] (3 of 4) [CMA-2947/2007]
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the claimants as well as learned counsel for the
RSRTC.
It is an admitted position that claimants failed to adduce
cogent evidence that deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per
month. So, in my considered opinion, the Tribunal rightly
calculated the income of the deceased as Rs.2500/- per month but
the Tribunal wrongly deducted 1/3rd amount of the deceased's
income towards personal expenses. As per the dependency, it
should be 1/4th amount of the deceased's income. The Tribunal
had not awarded any amount towards future prospects. As per the
age of the deceased, it should be 40% of the deceased's income.
The Tribunal awarded a very meager amount of Rs.10,000/-
towards loss of consortium to claimant No.1, Rs.40,000/-
(Rs.10,000/- each to claimant Nos. 2 to 5) towards love and
affection, whereas it should be Rs. 40,000/- for each claimant.
The Tribunal awarded a very meager amount of Rs.5,000/-
towards funeral expenses, whereas it should be Rs.15,000/-. So,
the judgment of the Tribunal is modified to the extent as under:-
Monthly income Rs.2500/-
Annual Income Rs.2500 X 12 =30,000/-
According to the age of the Rs.30,000 X 16 = 4,80,000/-
deceased, Multiplier of 16 shall
be applied
1/4 is to be deducted for Rs.4,80,000/- X 1/4 =
personal expenses of the 1,20.000/-
deceased (Rs.4,80,000-
Rs.1,20,000=3,60,000/-)
Future Prospects 3,60,000+1,44,000=5,04,000/-
(40% of the deceased's income)
Loss of consortium and love and Rs.2,00,000/-
[2024:RJ-JP:13796] (4 of 4) [CMA-2947/2007]
affection to claimants
(40,000 X 5)
Funeral expenses (+)
Rs.15,000/-
Amount of Transportation as
awarded by the Tribunal Rs.1000/-
Total
Rs.7,20,000/-
Less amount awarded by the
Tribunal Rs.3,76,000/-
Enhanced Amount of
compensation Rs.7,20,000 - Rs.3,76,000
=Rs.3,44,000/-
The claimants are entitled to get a further sum of
Rs.3,44,000/- as compensation. The RSRTC is directed to deposit
enhanced amount of Rs.3,44,000/- (Rs.7,20,000/- -
Rs.3,76,000/-) 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
withdraw the same. The enhanced amount shall carry @ 6.25%
interest per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the
actual payment is made.
In the result, appeal filed by the claimants 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
Jatin /19
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
