Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Udi Ben @ Chandra Devi And Anr. ... on 15 October, 2024
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2024:RJ-JD:42010]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2602/2016
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Through Divisional Manager,
T.p. Hub, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Shri J.k. Jagani, Abhay
Chambers, Jalori Gate, Jodhpur
----Appellant
Versus
1. Smt. Udi Ben @ Chandra Devi W/o Nainmal Sundesha,
Maliwas, Bhopanagar, Patanroad, Nava Disa Police Station
Disa, District Banaskantha Gujarat.
2. Nain Mal Mali S/o Likhma Ram, Maliwas, Bhopanagar,
Patanroad, Nava Disa Police Station Disa, District
Banaskantha Gujarat.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. N.K. Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.R. Patel
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Judgment
15/10/2024
1. The present civil misc. appeal has been preferred by the
appellant-Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 ('MV Act') assailing the judgment and award
dated 11.08.2016 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Balotra, District Barmer, ('Tribunal') in MAC Case
No.59/2014, whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim
petition filed by the respondents/claimants under Section 166 of
the MV Act and awarded compensation of Rs. 8,89,278/-, in
favour ofrespondents/claimants along with interest @ 9% p.a.from
the date of filing the claim petition, while fastening the liability
[2024:RJ-JD:42010] (2 of 4) [CMA-2602/2016]
jointly and severally upon the appellant-Insurance Company and
respondent no.2/owner and driver of the vehicle.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 17.09.2013,
when the deceased (aged 2 years and half) was travelling with his
parents in Bolero bearing number GJ-08-R-3874, driven by
respodnent no. 2, it collided with the vehicle moving ahead of it
and on account of the said collision, the deceased suffered injuries
and subsequently, died. Thereafter, an FIR was lodged, followed
by a claim petition filed by the respondent no.1/claimant before
the learned Tribunal seeking compensation for the death of her
deceased son. Subsequently, the learned Tribunal partly allowed
the claim and awarded Rs. 8,89,278/- @9% p.a. to the
respondent claimants, which has been assailed by way of filing the
present appeal and the award and judgment dated 11.08.2016
has been challenged by way of instant appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company makes
a limited submission while disputing the quantum of compensation
awarded by the learned Tribunal and submits that the award
passed by the learned Tribunal is on a higher side, considering the
age of the deceased to be two years and a half and thus, prays for
reduction towards the same, while placing reliance upon the
judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the
case of Hafiz Kamruddin & Anr. v. Anand Kumar & Ors.[S.B.
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 755 of 2017 decided on 01.09.2022].
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-claimants
submits that the award granted by the learned Tribunal is just and
thus, calls for no interference by this Court.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
[2024:RJ-JD:42010] (3 of 4) [CMA-2602/2016]
7. This Court finds that the compensation awarded by the
learned Tribunal in MAC Case No.59/2014 deserves to be reduced
and the Court deems it fit to assess a just compensation which is
reasonable according to the underlying facts and circumstances of
the case along with the evidence placed on record, in the light of
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Meena
Devi v Nunu Chand Mahto @ Nemchand Mahto & Others
[Civil Appeal No. 7255 of 2022 decided on 13.10.2022] and
Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali & another vs. Shyam Kishore
Murmu and another [CIVIL APPEAL NO.6902 OF 2021 decided
on 16.11.2021].
8. This Court also deems it just to take the notional income of
the deceased as Rs. 15,000/- while computing the loss of
dependancy, looking at the age of the deceased, i.e. two years
and a half. Furthermore, this Court also finds that the amount
awarded by the learned Tribunal towards the medical bills is just
and thus, this Court deems it fit not to interfere with the
compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal towards the
medical bills. This Court also deems it just to award Rs. 65,000/-
towards the conventional heads to the respondent no.1/claimant.
9. Thus, after arriving at the conclusion that the amount
awarded by the learned Tribunal deserves to be reduced in MAC
Case No. 59/2014, this Court directed both the counsels to jointly
submit the calculation of the compensation awardable to the
claimants, afresh in light of the guidelines laiddown by Hon'ble the
Supreme Court in the case of Meena Devi (supra) and Kurvan
Ansari (supra) which they have furnished before this Court in a
tabular form as below:
[2024:RJ-JD:42010] (4 of 4) [CMA-2602/2016]
Particulars Awarded by Tribunal Awarded by the Court
Loss of dependancy Rs. 4,50,000/- Rs, 2,25,000/-
(i.e. 15,000 x 15)
Medical Bills Rs. 3,89,278/- Rs. 3,89,278/-
Conventional Heads Rs. 50,000/- Rs. 65,000/-
Total Rs. 8,89,278/- Rs. 6,79,278/-
Amount reduced 2,10,000/-
10. Accordingly and in view of above discussion, the misc.
appealfiled by the appellant insurance company is partly allowed.
The claimants are thus held entitled to get compensation of
Rs.6,79,278/- instead of Rs. 8,89,278/-, jointly and severally from
appellant-Insurance Company and respondent No. 2 at the same
rate of interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal. The amount of
compensation is thus reduced by Rs. 2,10,000/-.The judgment
and award dated 11.08.2016 passed by the learned MACT,
Balotra, in MAC Case No.59/2014 is modified. The compensation
re-determined by this judgment, shall carry interest as awarded
by the learned Tribunal from the date of filing of claim petition.
The amount of compensation, if any disbursed to the claimants,
shall be adjusted accordingly.
11. Record be sent back forthwith. No order as to costs.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J
33-/amit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
