Rajasthan High Court
Dauji Sikarwar S/O Ramgopal vs United India Insurance Company Limited on 13 May, 2024
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 60/2022
1. Dauji Sikarwar S/o Ramgopal, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Village Neemari Ka Pura, Bahadurpur, Police Station,
Kanchanpur, District Dholpur.
2. Radha W/o Shri Dauji Sikarwar, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
Village Neemari Ka Pura, Bahadurpur, Police Station,
Kanchanpur, District Dholpur.
----Appellants
Versus
1. United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Its
Manager Having Its Zonal Office At 1, Ashok Circle, Alwar
(Rajasthan)
2. Kok Singh S/o Shankar Singh, R/o Bijoli, Police Station,
Bari, District Dholpur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Satish Kumar Khandal, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
Date of Judgment 13/05/2024
The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle
Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants-claimants (for
short 'the claimants') dissatisfied with the judgment and award
dated 13.09.2021 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Additional Sessions Judge), Bari District Dholpur (for short 'the
Tribunal') in claim case No.66/2018, whereby the Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs. 9,31,603/- along with interest @ 6% per
(2 of 5) [CMA-60/2022]
annum from the date of filing the claim petition in favour of the
claimants.
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.
Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Tribunal
while passing the impugned judgment and award has not
appreciated the evidence led by the claimants in the right
perspective. Learned counsel for the claimants further submits
that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the claimant
No.1 only Rs.207/- per day (207X26=Rs.5,382/- per month) on
the basis of minimum wages prevalent at the relevant of time for
unskilled labour. Learned counsel for the claimants further submits
that the Tribunal wrongly calculated the income of claimant No.1
for 26 days, whereas, it should be for 30 days. The Tribunal has
not awarded any amount towards future prospects, whereas as
per age of the claimants, it should be 25% of the claimant's
income. Learned counsel for the claimants also submits that due
to the accident, claimant No.2 had also received multiple injuries
but the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards pain and
suffering/said injuries. Learned counsel for the claimants also
submits that as per injury report and X-ray of claimant No.2, she
had received simple as well as grievous injuries. So, the claimant
No.2 is also entitled to get the compensation amount towards said
pain and suffering/said injuries. So, the judgment and award of
the Tribunal may be modified accordingly.
(3 of 5) [CMA-60/2022]
Learned counsel for the respondent No.1-United India
Insurance Company Limited (for short 'the Insurance Company')
has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the
claimants and submitted that the claimants failed to adduce any
cogent evidence that the claimant No.1 was earning Rs.15,500/-
per month. The Tribunal has rightly considered the claimant No.1's
income as Rs.207/- per day (207X26=Rs.5,382/- per month).
Learned counsel for the insurance company also submits that the
claimant No.2 had not submitted any bill regarding her treatment.
So, the Tribunal has not committed any error in not granting any
amount towards pain and suffering. So, the 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.
It is an admitted position that the claimants failed to adduce
any cogent evidence that the claimant No.1 was earning
Rs.15,500/- per month. So, in my considered opinion, the
Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the claimant No.1 as
Rs.207/- per day (207X26=Rs.5,382/- per month) on the basis of
minimum wages prevalent at the relevant of time for unskilled
labour but the Tribunal awarded the compensation for 26 days,
whereas it should be 30 days. The Tribunal has not awarded any
amount towards future prospects, whereas as per age of the
claimants, it should be 25% of claimant No.1's income. The
Tribunal has also committed an error in not granting any amount
towards said injuries as received by claimant No.2. As per injuries
report as well as X-ray report, the claimant No.2 is also entitled to
(4 of 5) [CMA-60/2022]
get Rs.10,000/- towards the pain and suffering/said injuries. So,
the judgment of the Tribunal is modified to the extent as under:-
Monthly Income 207X30 = Rs.6,210/-
Annual Income 6,210X12=Rs. 74,520/-
As per age of the claimants, 74,520X14=Rs.10,43,280/-
multiplier of 14 be applied
Loss of Income viz-a-viz was 10,43,280X50%= Rs.5,21,640/-
50% permanent disability
suffered by the claimant
Add 25% towards future 5,21,640+25% = Rs.6,52,050/-
prospects
Pain and suffering/injuries as Rs. 10,000/-
Medical Bills (+) Rs.4,79,515/-
Total Rs.11,41,565/-
Less amount awarded by the
Tribunal Rs.9,31,630/-
Enhanced amount of
compensation Rs.2,09,935/-
In view of the above, the claimants are entitled to get a
further sum of Rs.2,09,935/- as compensation. The Insurance
Company is directed to deposit enhanced amount of Rs.2,09,935/-
(11,41,565-9,31,630) 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 per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the
actual payment is made.
Rest part of the impugned judgment shall remain
unchanged. Impugned judgment and award is modified
accordingly.
(5 of 5) [CMA-60/2022]
Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Gourav/228
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
