Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Mana Ram And Ors. (2024:Rj-Jd:39486) on 23 September, 2024
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2024:RJ-JD:39486]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 513/2014
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Manager, Divisional
Office, Jaipur Road, Sikar (Rajasthan).
----Appellant
Versus
1. Smt. Kali Devi, w/o of Shri Bhiwa Ram
2. Shrawan s/o Late Shri Bhiwa Ram (minor)
3. Ku. Bimla d/o Late Shri Bhiwa Ram (minor)
4. Chuna Ram s/o Late Shri Deva Ram
5. Smt. Panchi Devi w/o Shri Chuna ram
Respondent no. 2 and 3 are minor through their natural
Guardian and Mother Smt. Kali Devi w/o Late Shri Bhiwa
Ram
All are r/o Village Jogalsar, Police Station Sandwa, District
Churu, (Rajasthan).
6. Gurmeet Singh s/o Shri Mal Singh, r/o Raipura, Police
Station Sadar Khanna, District Ludhiyana (Punjab).
7. Malkeet Singh s/o Shri Jai Singh, r/o H.No. 17B Samrala
road, Citi Khanna, District Ludhiyana (Punjab).
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 544/2014
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Manager, Divisional
Office, Jaipur Road, Sikar (Rajasthan).
----Appellant
Versus
1. Mana Ram, s/o Chuna Ram Nayak
2. Chuna Ram s/o Late Shri Deva Ram
3. Smt. Panchi Devi w/o Shri Chuna Ram
All are r/o Village Jogalsar, Police Station Sandwa, District
Churu, (Rajasthan).
4. Malkeet Singh s/o Shri Jai Singh, r/o H.No. 17B Samrala
road, Citi Khanna, District Ludhiyana (Punjab).
----Respondent
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 564/2015
1. Smt. Kali Devi, w/o of Shri Bhiwa Ram
2. Shrawan s/o Late Shri Bhiwa Ram (minor)
(Downloaded on 24/09/2024 at 09:01:12 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:39486] (2 of 8) [CMA-513/2014]
3. Ku. Bimla d/o Late Shri Bhiwa Ram (minor)
4. Chuna Ram s/o Late Shri Deva Ram
5. Smt. Panchi Devi w/o Shri Chuna ram
Respondent no. 2 and 3 are minor through their natural
Guardian and Mother Smt. Kali Devi w/o Late Shri Bhiwa
Ram All are r/o Village Jogalsar, Police Station Sandwa,
District Churu, (Rajasthan).
----Appellant
Versus
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Manager, Divisional
Office, Jaipur Road, Sikar (Rajasthan).
----Respondent
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 571/2015
1. Smt. Kali Devi, w/o of Shri Bhiwa Ram
2. Shrawan s/o Late Shri Bhiwa Ram (minor)
3. Ku. Bimla d/o Late Shri Bhiwa Ram (minor)
4. Chuna Ram s/o Late Shri Deva Ram
5. Smt. Panchi Devi w/o Shri Chuna ram
Respondent no. 2 and 3 are minor through their natural
Guardian and Mother Smt. Kali Devi w/o Late Shri Bhiwa
Ram All are r/o Village Jogalsar, Police Station Sandwa,
District Churu, (Rajasthan).
----Appellant
Versus
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Manager, Divisional
Office, Jaipur Road, Sikar (Rajasthan).
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. T.R.S. Sodha for the Insurance
Company
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Dadhich for the claimants
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Judgment
23/09/2024
[2024:RJ-JD:39486] (3 of 8) [CMA-513/2014]
1. The appeals, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 513/2014 and S.B.
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 544/2014 have been preferred by the
Insurance Company under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, 1988
assailing the judgment and award dated 21.12.2013 passed by
learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sujangarh, District
Churu, ('Tribunal') in MAC Cases No.24/2009 and 26/2009,
whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petitions
filed by the respondents/claimants and awarded compensation of
Rs. 7,69,000/- and 6,52,000/- respectivley, in favour of
respondents/claimants along with interest @ 6% p.a.from the date
of filing the claim petitions.
2. The appeals, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 564/2015 and S.B.
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 571/2015 have been preferred by the
claimants under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, 1988 assailing the
judgment and award dated 21.12.2013 passed by the learned
Tribunal in MAC Cases No. 24/2009 and 23/2009, whereby the
learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petitions filed by the
claimants and awarded a meagre compensation of Rs. 7,69,000/-
and Rs. 1,50,000/- respectively along with interest @ 6% p.a.
from the date of filing of claim petitions.
3. All the appeals are being decided by this common order,
however the facts of S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 513/2014 are
illustratively taken for consideration.
4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that, on 08.01.2009,
when the respondent/claimant no .1 was travelling with her
husband on a camel cart along with Shravan, Kumari Bimla, Sipu
Devi, Hanuman (aged 1 year) and Chunaram to Khandela brick
kilns (ईंट भट्टे ) for work, at 10:00 PM, at Village Trilokpura near NH-
[2024:RJ-JD:39486] (4 of 8) [CMA-513/2014]
11, a truck bearing no. RJ-13-GA-2866, insured with the
appellant-Insurance Company hit the cart on account of which all
the passengers travelling in the camel cart sustained injuries. On
account of the said injuries, Smt. Sipu, Hanuman and the husband
of the respondent/claimant no. 1, Bhiwa Ram died and thus their
claims were presented before the learned Tribunal, which has been
assailed by way of filing the present appeal and the award and
judgment dated 21.12.2013 has been challenged by way of
instant appeals.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company makes
a limited submission towards the fastening of the negligence of
the camel cart in the said incident. He thus submits that the
accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the camel
cart inasmuch as no reflector was attached to the cart, making it
difficult for the driver of the offending vehicle, i.e. truck, to see
the camel cart in the night. He also submits that since the driver
as well as the passengers of the camel cart were asleep, they did
not listen to the horn of the offending vehicle and acted
accordingly thereafter, on account of which the truck collided with
the camel cart and thus, te appellant-Insurance Company cannot
be held liable to pay compensation on account of negligence of the
driver of the camel cart.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants
submits that the accident occurred due to the sole negligence of
the truck as it was driving at a very high speed, in a very rash and
negligent manner, when it hit the camel cart.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants also submits
that the amount of compensation awarded in case of death of Late
[2024:RJ-JD:39486] (5 of 8) [CMA-513/2014]
Bhiwa Ram under the heads of consortium, funeral expenses and
loss of estates is on the lower side and also, the learned Tribunal
has erred in not awarding the future prospects.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent/claimants also submits
that the amount of compensation awarded in case of death of
Hanuman, aged 1 year, is also on a lower side and the same
deserves to be enhanced.
9. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the
parties and have perused the material available on record.
10. This Court finds that the learned Tribunal, after taking into
consideration the record, has observed that all the witnesses have
unianimously deposed this fact that the truck collided with the
camel cart from behind and it is on account of the said collision
that the truck also overturned. The learned Tribunal has also taken
into consideration the deposition of AW 3, Mana Ram who stated
that the truck had overturned on the spot on account of the said
accident.
11. This Court also finds that the statements of witnesses have
been confirmed by the FIR also, and after looking at the FIR as
well as Site-Plan, the learned Tribunal has rightly come to a
conclusion that it was due to rash and negligent driving of the
truck driver, the said accident occurred as on 08.01.2009, on NH-
11, the truck bearing no. RJ-13-GA-2866, was being driven rashly
and negligently & collided with the camel cart from behind, as a
result of which 3 people died and 2 persons suffered injuries, and
thus, this Court finds no merit in the arguments advanced by the
learned counsel for the appellant, pertaining to the negligence of
the said incident.
[2024:RJ-JD:39486] (6 of 8) [CMA-513/2014]
11. Nevertheless, this Court finds that the compensation
awarded by the learned Tribunal in MAC Case no. 24/2009
deserves to be enhanced in light of the guidelines laid down by
Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in
(2017)16 SCC 680, under the heads of future propects,
consortium and loss of estates. This Court also finds that the
compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal in MAC Case No.
23/2009 deserves to be enhanced 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].
12. Thus, after arriving at the conclusion that the amount
awarded by the learned Tribunal deserves to be enhanced in MAC
Case No. 24/2009 and 23/2009, this Court directed both the
counsel to jointly submit the calculation of the compensation
awardable to the claimants, afresh in light of the guidelines laid
down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported
in (2017)16 SCC 680 which they have furnished before this
court in a tabular form as below:
S.B.Civil Misc. Appeal No. 564/2015
[2024:RJ-JD:39486] (7 of 8) [CMA-513/2014]
Particulars Awarded by Tribunal Awarded by the Court
Loss of Income of the deceased Rs. 9,72,000/- Rs. 9,72,000/-
(4,500 x 12 x 18)
Adding future prospects @ 40% Not awarded Rs. 13,60,800/-
(i.e. 9,72,000/-+ 40% of
9,72,000/-)
Deducting ¼ towards personal Rs. 7,29,000/- Rs. 10,20,600/-
expenses (i.e. 13,60,800 - ¼ of
13,60,800) [A]
Consortium (48,000 x 5) [B] (5,000 x 3) + (5,000 x 3) Rs. 2,40,000/-
= Rs. 30,000/-
Loss of Estate [C] Not awarded Rs. 18,000/-
Funeral Expenses [D] Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 18,000/-
Total Rs. 7,69,000/- [E] Rs. 12,96,600/- [F]
Enhanced amount [F-E] Rs. 5,27,600/-
S.B.Civil Misc. Appeal No. 571/2015
Particulars Awarded by Tribunal Awarded by the Court
Compensation for death of one Rs. 1,50,000/- Rs. 1,70,000/-
year old child (lump sum),
Consortium (48,000 x 3) (5,000 x 3 = Rs. 15,000/-) Rs. 1,44,000/-
Funeral Expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 18,000/-
Loss of Estates Not awarded Rs. 18,000/-
Total Rs. 1,70,000/- Rs. 3,30,000/-
Enhanced amount Rs. 1,80,000/-
13. Accordingly, the appeals, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.
564/2015 and S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 571/2015 are partly
allowed and the amount of compensation payable to the claimants
in MAC Case No. 24/2009 is enhanced by Rs. 5,27,600/- and in
MAC Case No. 23/2009 is enhanced by Rs. 1,80,000/- in the
terms stated above. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @
6% per annum, as determined by the learned Tribunal from the
date of filing of claim petition.
14. Also, the appeals, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 513/2014 and
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 544/2014, preferred by the appellant-
Insurance Company are dismissed.
15. The award judgment-cum-award dated 21.12.2013 passed
by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sujangarh
[2024:RJ-JD:39486] (8 of 8) [CMA-513/2014]
in MAC Case No. 23/2009, 24/2009 and 26/2009 is modified
accordingly.
16. Any amount, if already paid, shall be adjusted accordingly.
No costs.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
166-/ajayS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
