Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Devi Singh And Anr vs Ajit Singh And Ors. (2025:Rj-Jd:8576) on 12 February, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:8576]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 460/2015
1. Devi Singh s/o Shri Prem Singh, aged about 36 years,
2. Smt. Shiru Kanwar w/o Devi Singh, aged about 34 years,
Both resident of Khara, Tehsil and District Bikaner (Raj.).
----Appellant/Claimants
Versus
1. Ajit Singh S/o Narayan Singh, R/o Asyato Ka Bass, Khara,
Police Station Jamsar, Tehsil and District Bikaner (Raj.).
Second Address Near Urmul Dairy, Khara, District Bikaner.
--Owner
2. Dhanne Singh S/o Jethmal Singh, R/o Village Post Chani,
Police Station Gajner, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner (Raj.).
--Driver
3. The United India Insurance Company Limited through
Divisional manager, Panchshati circle, Bikaner (Raj.).
--Insurance company
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dhruv Gehlot for Claimants
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aditya Singhi for Ins. Company
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
12/02/2025
1. Despite service upon respondent No.1-owner and respondent
No.2-driver, nobody has put in appearance.
2. The present civil misc. appeal has been preferred by the
appellants/claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 ('MV Act') assailing the judgment and award dated
29.10.2014 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal Bikaner, (Raj.), ('learned Tribunal') in Claim Case
No.103/2013, whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the
claim petition filed by the claimants and awarded compensation of
[2025:RJ-JD:8576] (2 of 5) [CMA-460/2015]
Rs.1,80,000/-, in favour of claimants along with interest @ 7.5%
p.a. while fastening the liability upon the respondents.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 18.12.2012, Kushal
Singh(deceased) was going to purchase some grocery item from
his house and when he reached on N.H.15, a Motorcycle bearing
Registration No.RJ-07-SL-6798, driven in a rash and negligent
manner by the respondent No.2, hit Kushal Singh and he received
simple as well as serious injuries and finally succumbed to death
on 21.12.2012. The claimants, filed a claim petition before the
learned Tribunal. Notices were issued and respondents Nos.1 and
2 did not appear and ex parte proceedings were drawn against
them. The respondent No.3-insurance company filed reply to the
claim petition while denying the averments made in the claim
petition. On the basis of the pleadings, the learned Tribunal
framed four issues. Oral as well as documentary evidences were
produced by the claimants in support of their claim petition and on
the other hand, only one witness was examined by the respondent
No.3 and after hearing both the parties, the learned Tribunal
partly allowed the claim petition of the claimants and held the
respondents liable to pay the quantum of compensation in favour
of the claimants and thus, being dissatisfied of the quantum, the
appellants have preferred the instant misc. appeal.
4. 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 awarded by the learned tribunal. Learned counsel
for the appellants submits that the deceased child who has
succumbed to the injuries, was 13 years old and was a brilliant
[2025:RJ-JD:8576] (3 of 5) [CMA-460/2015]
student of Class 8th and the learned Tribunal has erred in awarding
a meager amount of Rs.1,80,000/- as compensation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance
Company opposes and submits that the award passed by the
learned Tribunal is just and calls for no interference by this Court.
6. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced at
Bar and have gone through the material available on record.
7. This Court finds that the learned Tribunal has awarded the
lump-sum amount of Rs.1,80,000/- as quantum of compensation
to the appellants/claimants. However, this court finds that the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 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 the case of
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 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. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
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
[2025:RJ-JD:8576] (4 of 5) [CMA-460/2015]
awardable under the head of 'loss of dependency' and awarded Rs.
50,000/- under the conventional heads.
8. Thus, looking to the age of the deceased child (i.e., 13
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. Also, the applicable multiplier would be of 15 in
the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Divya vs. The National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors. :
[2022 INSC 1108]. Further, looking into the facts of the instant
case, this court deems it just to award Rs.1,15,000/- towards
conventional heads.
9. 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.1,30,000/- [C] Rs.4,50,000/-
(i.e. Rs.30000/- x [Rs.1,80,000 - Rs.50,000]
15) [A]
(After deducting the
Conventional Heads amount already disbursed Rs.1,15,000/-
[B] u/s 140, M.V. Act)
Total [A] + [B] Rs.5,65,000/- [D]
Enhanced Amount Rs.4,35,000/-
[D]-[C]
10. Thus, the instant appeal preferred by the
appellants/claimants is partly allowed. The impugned award
passed by the learned tribunal is modified accordingly.
11. Therefore, the appellants/claimants are held entitled to get
enhanced compensation of Rs.4,35,000/- along with interest @
7.5% (same as awarded by the learned tribunal) from the filing of
[2025:RJ-JD:8576] (5 of 5) [CMA-460/2015]
the claim petition in the same manner as directed by the learned
tribunal. The amount of compensation, if any disbursed to the
appellants/claimants, shall be adjusted accordingly. No order as to
costs.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
82-ajayS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
