Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Santosh And Ors. ... on 23 October, 2024
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2024:RJ-JD:43641]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1074/2016
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through Divisional Manager,
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., TP Hub, Pal Road, Jodhpur.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Smt. Santosh W/o Shri Rajesh Puri,
2. Rajesh Puri S/o Shri Ghewar Puri,
Both are residents of Dangiyawas, Tehsil and District
Jodhpur.
3. Om Singh S/o Shri Kishan Singh, Resident of House No.09,
Lohar Colony, Dharamnaryan Ji Ka Hatha, Paota, Jodhpur.
4. Ajit Kalla S/o Shri Vinod Kalla, Resident of Tilak Nagar,
Harijan Basti, Udaimandir, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Dadhich.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Sankhla, R-1 & 2/claimants
None present for R 3 & 4.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Judgment
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 01.02.2016 (hereinafter as 'the
impugned award') passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal-I, Jodhpur (hereinafter as 'the learned Tribunal') in MAC
Case No.394/2012 (2089/2014) (filed under Section 166 of the
Act), whereby the learned tribunal has awarded Rs.5,00,000/-
along with interest @8.5% (from the date of filing of the claim
[2024:RJ-JD:43641] (2 of 4) [CMA-1074/2016]
petition i.e., 13.04.2012 to the appellants/claimants and held the
respondents/non-claimants jointly and severally liable to pay the
said compensation.
4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 29.09.2011 at
about 04:40 pm, deceased Hanuman Puri (8 years old at the time
of the accident) while deceased was walking towards his house,
then a Scorpio Vehicle bearing registration number RJ-19-UA-
1555, which was plied by its driver rashly and negligently, hit
deceased from behind, as a result of which Hanuman Puri died on
the spot. The FIR was lodged before the Police Station
Dangiyawas, Jodhpur and after investigation, a charge sheet was
filed against driver of the offending vehicle. Subsequently, the
appellants/claimants filed the claim petition- MAC Case
No.394/2012 (2089/2014) under Section 166 of the Act before the
learned tribunal, seeking compensation on account of the death of
the deceased child to tune of Rs.2,87,60,000/-. The respondent
nos.1 and 2 and 3 filed reply to the claim petition before the
learned tribunal while refuting the claim laid by the claimants.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties learned tribunal
framed four issues. The appellants/claimants examined AW.1
Santosh and AW.2 Kailash Puri and produced some documentary
evidences whereas the respondents did not examine any witness,
however, produced documentary evidence before the learned
Tribunal. After hearing the parties and on the basis of the material
available on record the leaned tribunal partly allowed the MAC
case no. 394/2012 (2089/2014) vide the impugned award and
awarded Rs.5,00,000/- along with interest @8.5% (from the date
of the filing of the claim petition i.e. 13.04.2012 as compensation
[2024:RJ-JD:43641] (3 of 4) [CMA-1074/2016]
to the appellants/claimants and held respondents jointly and
severally liable to pay the said compensation.
6. Aggrieved by the impugned award the instant misc. appeal
has been preferred by the appellants/claimants.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned
Tribunal has awarded higher compensation on account of death of
a child, who was eight years of age at the time of accident and
has misconstrued the law laid by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Kishan Gopal v. Lala : 2013 ACJ 2594. Learned counsel for the
appellant further submits that the claimants have failed to prove
the age of the deceased by exhibiting reliable documents.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants
No.1 and 2 supported the award passed by the learned Tribunal
and submits the same calls for no interference by this Court. None
is present on behalf of respondent No.3 and 4.
9. The instant misc. appeal was admitted by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.05.2016 and an interim
order was passed while directing the appellant to deposit
Rs.3,50,000/- (inclusive of the amounts earlier paid) within three
weeks from 16.05.2016. The amount aforesaid was directed to be
disbursed to the respondents/claimants in accordance with law
and rest of the amount was stayed during pendency of the appeal.
10. Heard the counsels appearing on behalf of the appellant and
respondents/claimants and perused the material available on
record.
11. This Court finds that while awarding compensation of
Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of respondents/claimants, the learned
Tribunal while considering the age of the deceased, who was eight
[2024:RJ-JD:43641] (4 of 4) [CMA-1074/2016]
years of age, has awarded compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- in
favour of claimants, which is in accordance with the ratio in the
case of Kishan Gopal (supra), and therefore, this Court is of the
considered view that the judgment and award passed by the
learned Tribunal does not suffer from any illegality. The
compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal in favour of
respondents/claimants is adequate and calls for no interference by
this Court. The learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the
claimants under the head of loss of consortium of Rs.50,000/-,
which is also just and proper.
12. Accordingly, this Court finds no force in the instant misc.
appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. The amount withheld
under the interim orders of this Court along with interest, as
awarded by the learned Tribunal, shall be paid by the appellant
insurance company within a period of four weeks from the date of
this judgment.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J
69-DJ/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
