Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Meera Devi vs Sona Ram (2024:Rj-Jd:39957) on 25 September, 2024
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2024:RJ-JD:39957]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1548/2023
1. Meera Devi W/o Late Shri Joga Ram, age 54 years, R/o
Village Gol, Tehsil and District Sirohi.
2. Mahendra Kumar S/o Late Shri Joga Ram, age 31 years,
R/o Village Gol, Tehsil and District Sirohi.
3. Ashok Kumar S/o Late Shri Joga Ram, age 27 years, R/o
Village Gol, Tehsil and District Sirohi.
4. Harish S/o Late Shri Joga Ram, age 24 years, R/o Village
Gol, Tehsil and District Sirohi.
5. Pushpa D/o Late Shri Joga Ram, age 34 years, R/o Village
Goyali, Tehsil and District Sirohi.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Sona Ram S/o Shri Pema Ji Vishnoi, age 32 years, R/o
Rajalanada Peelwa, Police Station Lohawat, Tehsil
Phalodi, District Jodhpur. (Driver of Vehicle Trailor No. Rj
19 GC 5081)
2. Suresh Vishnoi S/o Shri Jala Ram Vishnoi, age 31 years,
R/o 32, Near Kudi Houd, Guda Vishnoiyan, Basni
(Baghela), Tehsil and District Jodhpur. (Owner of Vehicle
Trailor No. Rj 19 GC 5081)
3. National Insurance Company Limited, through Regional
Manager, 12 Residency Road, District Jodhpur. (Insurance
Company of Vehicle Trailor No. RJ 19 GC 5081)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manish Rajpurohit.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. T.R.S. Sodha, R-3.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Judgment
25/09/2024
1. This misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 ('Act') has been preferred by the appellants/claimants
[2024:RJ-JD:39957] (2 of 7) [CMA-1548/2023]
seeking enhancement of compensation amount quantified and
awarded by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Sirohi ('Tribunal') by its award dated 08.08.2023 in MAC Case
No.86/2020 (C.I.S. No.86/2020), whereby the learned Tribunal
awarded compensation of Rs.33,31,062/- in favour of claimant
along with interest @ 6.5% p.a. The liability of paying the
compensation was fastened upon all the non-claimants jointly and
severally.
2. Succinctly stated, the facts giving rise to this appeal are that
the appellants/claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166
of the Act claiming compensation of Rs.90,90,000/- on account of
unfortunate death of their sole breadwinner late Sh. Joga Ram,
who lost his life in the accident took place on 04.03.2020. In the
claim petition, it was stated that on 04.03.2020 at about 09:30
am, deceased Joga Ram was going on his Moped bearing
registration number RJ-24-SM-6910 to his workshop from village
Gol to Paldi-M, then on NH No.62 on Paldi-M Bypass, when he
reached at Morli overbridge, a Trailor, which was driven by its
driver non-claimant No.1 in negligent manner, hit the deceased
from behind. As a result of which, Joga Ram sustained injuries and
died on spot. An FIR No.39/2020 was lodged at Police Station
Paldi-M, wherein after investigation charge sheet came to be filed
against the driver of the offending vehicle for offences under
Sections 279, 304 A of IPC before the competent court. In the
claim petition, it was stated that deceased Joga Ram was working
as Office Attendant in Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank, Paldi-M
and the claimants were his dependents. It was stated that
deceased was getting salary of Rs.38,000/- per month. The the
[2024:RJ-JD:39957] (3 of 7) [CMA-1548/2023]
claim petition was filed by the claimants on 24.08.2020 claiming
compensation under various heads.
3. After issuance of the notices of the claim petition and despite
service of the summons upon the non-claimant No.1, nobody put
in appearance on his behalf and, therefore, exparte proceedings
were drawn against him. Reply to claim petition was filed by non-
claimant No.2 while denying the contents of the claim petition. It
was stated that on 04.03.2020 the deceased himself was
negligent in plying his moped and on account of slipping of the
moped, he received injuries, however, a false case was foisted
against him. Thus, it was prayed that the claim petition be
rejected.
4. On behalf of non-claimant No.3 i.e. insurance company,
reply to claim petition was filed while denying the contents of the
same. It was however admitted by the insurance company that
the vehicle was insured with it from 20.11.2019 to 19.11.2020. It
was stated that the offending vehicle was plied by its driver in
correct direction, however, the deceased while overtaking another
vehicle the deceased met with the accident. It was further alleged
that the offending vehicle was being plied without fitness
certificate and valid/effective licence by its driver, therefore, it was
prayed that the claim petition be rejected.
5. The learned Tribunal, on the strength of pleadings of the
parties, settled four issues for determination.
6. For proving his case, the appellant examined AW.1 Harish
Kumar and AW.2 Askar Khan (eyewitness) and also placed on
record documents, which were exhibited as Ex. 1 to 28. The Non-
claimants, however, did not lead any evidence.
[2024:RJ-JD:39957] (4 of 7) [CMA-1548/2023]
7. The learned Tribunal vide its judgment and award dated
08.08.2023 while deciding Issue No.1, after considering the
evidence produced before it, has observed that FIR (Ex.2) was
lodged by the son of the deceased, wherein after investigation
charge sheet (Ex.1) was filed against the driver/non-claimant No.1
for offences under Section 279 and 304 A of IPC. The learned
Tribunal recorded a finding that though the non-claimants pleaded
that the accident took place due to negligent driving of rider of
moped, however, neither any evidence was produced, nor report
was lodged by the non-claimants. The claimants in support of their
claim examined AW.2 Askar Khan, who was the eyewitness of the
incident, whose testimony was not refuted by leading plausible
evidence by the non-claimants. The learned Tribunal thus
considering the evidence available on record found that there was
negligence on the part of the driver of the offending Trailor. The
learned Tribunal while deciding the Issue No.2 has assessed the
monthly income of the deceased as Rs.43,348/- and awarded total
compensation of Rs.33,31,062/- under various heads. The learned
Tribunal decided the Issue No.3 against the non-claimant No.3
insurance company.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants has
strenuously urged that though the learned Tribunal while awarding
compensation under the head of loss of income has assessed the
monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.43,348/-, however,
miserably erred in calculating the annual income of the deceased
as Rs.4,55,632/- instead of Rs.5,20,176/- and, therefore, the said
error deserves to be corrected and compensation under the head
of loss of income deserves to be enhanced while considering the
[2024:RJ-JD:39957] (5 of 7) [CMA-1548/2023]
annual income of the deceased at Rs.5,20,176/- and adding future
prospects with appropriate multiplier. Learned counsel for the
appellants further submits that the accident took place in the year
2020 and the as per the law propounded by Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi :
(2017) 16 SCC 680, wherein it has been held that amount towards
loss of estate and funeral expenses, will be increased up to 10% in
every three years. Thus, the compensation awarded under the
said heads also deserves to be enhanced. Learned counsel for the
appellants further submits that the compensation awarded under
the heads of loss of consortium also deserves enhancement in
view of judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Pranay Sethi (supra).
9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents
submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned
Tribunal is just and reasonable, which calls for no interference.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the
impugned award and through scanned the material available on
record.
11. In order to thrash out the matter for ascertaining cause of
accident, resulting in death, the impugned award deserves judicial
scrutiny on Issue No.2. On appreciation of evidence, the learned
Tribunal though has considered and assessed the monthly income
of the deceased at Rs.43,348/-, however, erred while calculating
the annual income of the deceased as Rs.4,55,632/- instead of
Rs.5,20,176/- and, therefore, the said error deserves to be
corrected. This Court finds that the learned Tribunal has awarded
15% towards future prospects, which looking to the age and other
[2024:RJ-JD:39957] (6 of 7) [CMA-1548/2023]
material available on record, is appropriate. This Court finds that
the multiplier applied by the learned Tribunal 9 is also proper. The
claimants are also entitled to receive compensation under the loss
of consortium @ 48,000/- each and the compensation awarded
under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses are also
enhanced.
12. Accordingly, in view of above discussion, the instant misc.
appeal preferred by the appellants/claimants is partly allowed. The
judgment and award dated 08.08.2023 passed by learned Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirohi in MAC Case No.86/2020
(C.I.S. No.86/2020) is modified accordingly and the claimants are
held entitled to get enhanced compensation as under: -
S. No. Particulars Amount Amount
awarded by the awarded and
Tribunal enhanced by
this Court
1. Compensation under the head of loss of Rs.30,61,062/- Rs.35,06,418/-
income
43,348 x 12 = Rs.5,20,176/-
Less Income Tax Rs. 12,000/-
Yearly Income Rs.5,08,176/-
Add: Future Prospects Rs. 76,226/-
@ 15% Rs.5,84,402/-
Less 1/3rd deduction Rs.1,94,800/-
Rs.3,89,602/-
3,89,602 x 9 = Rs.35,06,418/-
Multiplier of 9 is applied.
2. Consortium (Rs.48,000 x 6) Rs.2,40,000 Rs.2,88,000/-
3. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/- Rs.18,000/-
4. Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000/- Rs.18,000/-
Grand Total Rs.33,31,062/- Rs.38,30,418/-
Less amount awarded by learned Tribunal Rs.33,31,062/-
Enhanced Amount Rs.4,99,356/-
13. The appellants/claimants are thus held entitled to get
enhanced compensation of Rs.4,99,356/-. The respondents/non-
claimants are accordingly directed to pay the said enhanced
compensation to the appellants/claimants within a period of six
[2024:RJ-JD:39957] (7 of 7) [CMA-1548/2023]
weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order along
with interest @ 6.5%, as awarded by learned Tribunal.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
273-DJ/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
