Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Meenu Pooniya And Anr vs Mukhtayar Singh And Anr. ... on 23 October, 2024
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2024:RJ-JD:43647]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2586/2016
1. Smt. Meenu Pooniya W/o Rahul Pooniya, Village-
Panchkosi, Tehsil- Abohar, District- Ferozepur Punjab
2. Sh. Rahul Pooniya S/o Sh. Ram Singh, Village- Panchkosi,
Tehsil- Abohar, District- Ferozepur Punjab
----Appellants
Versus
1. Mukhtayar Singh S/o Jeet Ram, Village- Pai, Police Station
Pundari, District- Kaithal, Haryana, Alternate Address-
Present Constable No. 3179263 P, 7 Jat Regiment
Through 56 Apo
2. Union Of India Through Secretary, Defense Ministry, New
Delhi
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Aakash Kukkar.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Dimple Rajpurohit.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
23/10/2024
1. The instant misc. appeal, seeking enhancement, has been
preferred by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter as 'the Act') against the
judgment and award dated 22.07.2016 (hereinafter as 'the
impugned award') passed by MACT Suratgarh (hereinafter as 'the
learned tribunal') in MAC Case no. 09/2015 (01/2006), (CIS
42/2015) (filed under Section 166 of the Act), whereby the
learned tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,00,000/- along with interest @
8% (from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e., 03.06.2005 to
[2024:RJ-JD:43647] (2 of 5) [CMA-2586/2016]
the appellants/claimants and held the respondents/non-claimants
jointly and severally liable to pay the said compensation.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 26.03.2004
deceased Rimjhim was traveling with her Uncle Virendra
Choudhary & family on Accent Car No.RJ-07-Temp-0063 from
Suratgarh for a wedding. The said car when reached near Dairy
Farm gate Rohi Mauja at NH15 then suddenly from front a Military
Vehicle No.01 D 130169 E came whose driver while driving rashly
and negligently smashed the Car in which the deceased was
sitting. Due to which deceased got seriously injured and on the
very spot she died. The FIR of the above incident was registered
as 182/2004 dated 26.03.2004 at Police Station Suratgarh. The
accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of Driver.
Subsequently, the appellants/claimants filed the claim petition-
MAC Case no. 09/2015 (01/2006), (CIS 42/2015) under Section
166 of the Act before the learned tribunal, seeking compensation
on account of the death of the deceased child. As the respondent
nos.1 and 2 reply to the claim petition before the learned tribunal
and denied almost all the averments of the claim petition.
3. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties learned tribunal
framed four issues. The appellants/claimants produced oral as well
as some documentary evidences in support of their claim petition.
After hearing the parties and on the basis of the material available
on record the leaned tribunal partly allowed the MAC case no.
09/2015 (01/2006), (CIS 42/2015) vide the impugned award and
awarded Rs. 2,00,000/- along with interest @8% (from the date
of the filing of the claim petition i.e., 03.06.2005 as compensation
[2024:RJ-JD:43647] (3 of 5) [CMA-2586/2016]
to the appellants/claimants and held respondents jointly and
severally liable to pay the said compensation.
4. Aggrieved by the impugned award the instant misc. appeal
has been preferred by the appellants/claimants.
5. Since there is no dispute as to the facts of the case the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants
has restricted his submissions only to the quantum of the
compensation as awarded by the learned tribunal.
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants/claimants submits that the learned tribunal has erred in
awarding such meager compensation on account of the death of
the deceased child.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 & 2
submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and
calls for no interference by this Court.
8. Heard the counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and
perused the material available on record.
9. This court finds that the learned tribunal has awarded the
lump-sum amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation to the
appellants/claimants. However, this court finds that the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Kishan Gopal and Ors. Vs. Lala and Ors.
[(2014) 1 SCC 244], where the age of the deceased child was 10
years has taken the notional income of the deceased child as Rs.
30,000/- p.a. looking to the facts and circumstances. Further, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kurvan Ansari and Ors. Vs. Shyam
Kishore Murmu and Ors.[(2022) 1 SCC 317], where the age of
the deceased child was 7 years, has taken notional income of the
deceased child as Rs. 25,000/- p.a. and after applying Multiplier of
[2024:RJ-JD:43647] (4 of 5) [CMA-2586/2016]
15 granted total of Rs. 3,75,000/- under the head of 'loss of
dependency' and also an amount of Rs. 40,000/- to each of the
parents under the head of filial consortium and Rs.15,000/- under
the head of funeral expenses. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Meena Devi Vs. Nunu Chand Mahto and Ors[(2023) 1 SCC
204], where the age of the deceased child was 12 years, has
taken the notional income as Rs. 30,000/- p.a. including future
prospect and applied Multiplier of 15 to arrive at the compensation
awardable under the head of 'loss of dependency' and awarded Rs.
50,000/- under the conventional heads.
10. Thus, looking to the age of the deceased child (i.e., 10
years) and peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case
and in the light of the above cited judgments, this court deems it
appropriate to take the notional income of the deceased child as
Rs.30,000/- p.a.. Further, the applicable multiplier would be of 15
in the light of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in
Divya vs. The National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors. [2022
INSC 1108]. Further, looking into the facts of the instant case
where there are two claimants, who are the parents of the
deceased, this court deems it just to award Rs. 1,15,000/-
(rounded off from Rs.1,14,950 /-) under the conventional heads.
11. Thus, in view of discussion in the above paragraphs the
compensation awardable to the appellants/claimants is as under:
Particulars Awarded by Tribunal Awarded/modified by the
Court
Loss of dependancy Rs. 4,50,000/-
(i.e. 30,000 x 15) [A] Rs. 2,00,000/-
Conventional Heads [B] (Lump-sum) Rs. 1,15,000/-
[2024:RJ-JD:43647] (5 of 5) [CMA-2586/2016]
Total [A] + [B] [C] Rs. 5,65,000/- [D]
Enhanced Amount [D]-[C] Rs.3,65,000/-
12. Thus, the instant appeal preferred by the
appellants/claimants is partly allowed. The impugned award
passed by the learned tribunal is modified accordingly.
13. Therefore, the appellants/claimants are held entitled to get
enhanced compensation of Rs.3,65,000/- along with interest @8%
(same as awarded by the learned tribunal) from the filing of the
claim petition in the same manner as directed by the learned
tribunal.
14. The amount of compensation, if any disbursed to the
appellants/claimants, shall be adjusted accordingly.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J
75-pradeep/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
