Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
United India Insurance Company Limited vs Smt. Pinki And Ors. (2024:Rj-Jd:36889) on 4 September, 2024
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2024:RJ-JD:36889]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1679/2013
United India Insurance Company Limited, through its legally
constituted Authority Divisional Office, 12-D, Residency Road,
Jodhpur.
----Appellant/non-claimant No.3
Versus
1. Smt. Pinki W/o late Sh. Balkishan
2. Jitu S/o late Sh. Balkishan (minor)
3. Mst. Anjali D/o late Sh. Balkishan (minor)
4. Rohit S/o late Sh. Balkishan (minor)
5. Mst. Babu D/o late Sh. Balkishan (minor)
Minor are represented through their natural guardian
mother Smt. Pinki.
6. Smt. Hulasi Devi W/o late Shri Sita Ram,
All residents of Tilak Nagar, udai Mandir, Jodhpur.
(claimants)
7. Kuldeep Singh S/o Shri Pratap Singh Gehlot Mali, Resident
of Sukhram Nagar, Soorsagar, Jodhpur. (Driver)
8. Smt. Mohini W/o Shri Pratap Singh Gehlot Mali, Resident of
Sukhram Nagar, Soorsagar, Jodhpur. (Owner)
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jagdish Vyas.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Sankhala.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Judgment
04/09/2024
1. The appellant/non-claimant No.3 has filed by the instant
appeal under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, 1988, challenging the
validity of the judgment and award dated 03.04.2019 passed by
learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I), Jodhpur
('Tribunal') in MAC Case No.894/2010, whereby the learned
[2024:RJ-JD:36889] (2 of 6) [CMA-1679/2013]
Tribunal has awarded compensation in favour of claimants to tune
of Rs.15,21,000/- along with interest @ 8.5% p.a. from the date
of filing the claim petition on account of death of Sh. Balkishan.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that claimants filed a
claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, 1988 before the
learned Tribunal claiming compensation on account of untimely
death of their breadwinner late Sh. Balkishan. In the claim petition
it was stated by the claimants that on 07.12.2010, while deceased
along with her daughter was returning from Om Banna's Than
riding on Motorcycle No.RJ-19-SR-4648, and when it reached near
Rohat at about 11:45 am, a bus RJ-19-P-8081) which was being
plied by its driver rashly and negligently, hit the motorcycle. As a
result of which, Balkishan sustained injuries and he died on the
spot. At the time of accident, the deceased was 34 years of age
and thus the claimants filed claim petition claiming compensation
of Rs.68,58,000/-.
3. The non-claimants were summoned. After service of the
summons, the non-claimants No.1 and 2 filed their reply to claim
petition while contesting the claim petition. On behalf of non-
claimant No.3 i.e. insurance company, reply to claim petition was
filed while denying the averments therein for want of knowledge,
however, it was admitted that during the interregnum period i.e.
from 09.06.2010 to 08.06.2010, the vehicle was insured with it. It
was stated in the reply that the insurance company was not
informed about the accident by the owner of the vehicle. It was
further stated by the non-claimant No.3 that driver of the
offending bus was also not having valid and effective licence and
thus on account of violation of conditions of the policy, the
[2024:RJ-JD:36889] (3 of 6) [CMA-1679/2013]
liability of paying compensation could not have been fastened
upon the insurance company. It was further stated that the
claimants have claimed excess amount of compensation and
prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
4. As per the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal
framed four issues, including relief. In support of their claim, the
claimants examined Pinki and Pushpa. In documentary evidence,
the claimants exhibited 14 documents. On behalf of non-
claimants, no evidence was led.
5. The learned Tribunal, after hearing the arguments of the
parties and perusing the material placed before, it vide judgment
and award dated 03.04.2019 proceeded to partly allowed claim
petition and awarded compensation of Rs.15,21,000/- along with
interest @ 8.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim
petition while holding the appellant liable to pay the aforesaid
compensation.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant insurance
company submits that the learned Tribunal has erred assessing
the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6000/-, inasmuch as no
documentary evidence was produced by the claimants. Learned
counsel for the appellant insurance company submits that the
learned Tribunal ought to have considered the monthly wages at
Rs.2990/- considering him as a skilled labour. Learned counsel for
the appellant further submits that the compensation awarded by
the learned Tribunal qua non-pecuniary loss is also on higher side
and the same also deserves to be awarded in view of Guidelines
laid down by the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority and in
view of judgment passed by Hon'ble Court in the case of National
[2024:RJ-JD:36889] (4 of 6) [CMA-1679/2013]
Insurance Co. Ltd v. Pranay Sethi : 2017 (16) SCC 680.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the learned
Tribunal has awarded 50% future prospects, which looking to the
age of the deceased, deserves to be 40%.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for claimants
opposes the submissions made by counsel for the insurance
company and submits that the compensation awarded by the
learned Tribunal is adequate
8. While admitting the instant appeal, a Coordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 03.04.2014 directed that the claimants
shall continue to receive the interest upon the fixed deposits,
which have been opened under the directions of the learned
Tribunal, but the fixed deposit receipts shall not be encashed
without leave of the Court.
9. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the
parties at length and have perused the material available on
record.
10. This Court finds that the claimants have not produced any
evidence to substantiate the fact that the deceased was earning
Rs.6000/- per month and at the most the deceased could have
been considered as an skilled labour and the monthly wages
should be considered as Rs.2990/- while deducting ¼ qua the
personal expenses of the deceased looking the number of
dependents. This Court also finds that the compensation awarded
under other heads viz. consortium/loss of care and guidance
deserves to be modified. The claimants are thus held entitled to
get compensation under the head of consortium/loss of care and
guidance @ Rs.48,000/- for each claimant and the claim awarded
[2024:RJ-JD:36889] (5 of 6) [CMA-1679/2013]
by the learned Tribunal under the heads of loss of estate and
funeral expenses is also reduced to Rs.18,000/- each.
11. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the learned
Tribunal towards the loss of income is required to be re-quantified
in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation : AIR 2009 SC
3104, which is as under: -
Minimum wages : Rs.2990/-
Yearly income 2990 x 12 = 35,880/-
Multiplier of 35,880 x 16 = 5,74,080/-
Add Future Prospects 40% = 2,29,632/-
Rs.8,03,712/-
Less: ¼ deduction Rs.2,00,066/-
Loss of Income 6,02,784/-
12. Accordingly, the compensation is accordingly re-quantified as
under: -
S. No. Particulars Amount
1. Compensation towards loss of income while adding Rs.6,02,784/-
40% towards future prospects along with multiplier
of 16.
2. Consortium [48,000 x 6 = 2,88,000/-] Rs. 2,88,000/-
3. Loss of Estate Rs.18,000/-
4. Funeral Expenses Rs.18,000/-
Gross Total Rs.9,26,784/-
13. Accordingly and in view of above discussion, the misc. appeal
filed by the appellant insurance company is partly allowed. The
claimants are thus held entitled to get compensation of
Rs.9,26,784/- instead of Rs.15,21,000/- as awarded by the
learned Tribunal. The amount of compensation is thus reduced by
Rs.5,94,216/-. The judgment and award dated 03.04.2019
passed by the learned MACT-I, Jodhpur, in MAC Case
No.894/2010 is modified. The compensation re-determined by this
judgment, shall carry interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal
[2024:RJ-JD:36889] (6 of 6) [CMA-1679/2013]
from the date of filing of claim petition. The amount of
compensation, if any disbursed to the claimants, shall be
adjusted.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
96-DJ/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
