SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Raj) 2796

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
G.S.Sarraf, J.
Kundan - Appellant
Versus
Mangal Ram and Ors. - Respondent
C.M.A. No. 623 of 1996.
Decided On : 23-02-2006

Advocates:
For the Appellant:K.N. Tiwari, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R.S. Rathore, Advocate.

Headnote:Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – S. 168 – the deceased 25 years old a married lady and claimant is her husband aged 26 years. The tribunal concluded that there is possibility of remarriage as he is young so compensation awarded Rs. 1,25,000. Appeal filed seeking enhancement. Appeal dismissed and decision of tribunal upheld.

JUDGMENT

1. - The claimant-appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment/award dated 5.6.1996 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur.

2. According to the claim petition filed in the Tribunal, the claimant-appellant along with his wife Reena @ Vimla was going on Scooter from the side of Shastri Nagar Police Station towards city in Jaipur at about 11.30 p.m. on 7.3.1993. Respondent No. 1 was driving motor cycle No. RJ-14-5M-7473 rashly and negligently and collied with the Scooter in front of the mosque. Reena @ Vimla died in the accident. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- in favour of the claimant-appellant. Aggrieved by this, the claimant appellant has filed this appeal.

3. Mr. K.N. Tiwari, the learned Counsel for the claimant-appellant has said that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and adequate and, therefore, it should be increased. He has placed reliance on and .

4. Mr. R.S. Rathore, the learned Counsel for the respondent has supported the judgment of the Tribunal and has said that there is no ground for interference in the order of the learned Tribunal.

5. The deceased Reena @ Vimla was around 25 years old at the time of her death. She has died issueless. In the claim petition, the claimant-appellant has shown his age to be 26 years and, therefore, the possibility of remarriage is there a if he is not already remarried. The learned Tribunal after discussing the evidence in detail came to the conclusion that the deceased did not have any income from tuition. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,25,000/- in favour of the claimant-appellant. The amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and there is absolutely no ground for taking a different view in the matter.

6. Consequently the appeal of the claimant-appellant fails and the same is hereby dismissed.No order as to costs.Appeal dismissed.

*******


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top