HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, BENCH AT JAIPUR
PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR, J.
Smt. Shahnaj, W/o. Late Shri Suresh and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Dola Singh, S/o Shri Kishan Singh and Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3388 of 2016
Decided On : 11-03-2025
(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 - Appeal for enhancement of compensation - The Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,87,947/- for the death of Suresh, but the appellants claimed inadequacy based on uncontroverted evidence of income and future prospects - The court found the Tribunal's assessment of income and compensation inadequate, failing to follow Supreme Court precedents. (Paras 1, 8, 14, 17)
(B) Compensation - The court recalculated the monthly income of the deceased considering future prospects and determined total compensation of Rs. 16,67,400/- with 8% interest from the date of filing. (Paras 15, 17)
Facts of the case:
The deceased was involved in a motorcycle accident caused by a trailer driven negligently, resulting in his death. The claimants sought compensation for loss of income and other damages.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal's compensation was inadequate, and the court modified the award to Rs. 16,67,400/- with interest.
Issues: The main issues were the adequacy of the compensation awarded and the proper calculation of the deceased's income.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to follow Supreme Court guidelines for compensation calculation, particularly regarding future prospects and conventional heads.
Result: Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGEMENT :
(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR, J.)
1. The instant civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) praying enhancement in the award dated 12.05.2016 passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar, District Ajmer, in claim case No. 33/2015 titled as Smt. Shahnaj and ors. vs. Shri Dola Singh and ors. whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 12,87,947/- in favour of appellants- claimants along with interest @ 6% per annum on account of death of Shri Suresh.
2. As per the averments made in the appeal, on 24.11.2014, the deceased Suresh was travelling on the Motor Cycle along with one Shrawan from Beawar to Ajmer. When they reached near Kharwa Choraha, suddenly a Trailer bearing No. RJ-30-GA-7133 came from wrong side which was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1 and dashed the Motor Cycle as a result of which deceased fell down from the Motor Cycle and due to grievous injuries on various parts of the body, died. Hence, claim petition No.33/2015 was filed before the Tribunal.
3. Notices were served to the respondents. Respondents No.1 and 2 i.e. driver and owner appeared before the learned Tribunal and have filed joint written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. Respondent No.3-Insurance Company of the offending vehicle appeared and filed the written statement disputing all the averments made in the claim petition.
4. The Tribunal has framed five issues for consideration. Before the Tribunal, the claimants examined AW-1 Shahnaj and AW-2 Shrawan and produced documentary evidence Ex.1 to Ex.33. No oral or documentary evidence has been adduced by the respondents.
5. On the basis of oral and documentary evidence produced by the claimants, the Tribunal held that the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.12,87,947/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of its realization.
6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award dated 12.05.2016, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants-claimants.
7. Heard the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submits that deceased Suresh was working as a Mason and was also doing the work of agriculture, the evidence of the appellants-claimants remained uncontroverted even then the learned Tribunal in absence of any counter evidence assessed a meager amount of Rs. 4914/- per month as income of deceased. It is also contended that the learned Tribunal has also erred in not granting future prospects as per the binding precedents of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Under conventional heads also, the learned Tribunal has not followed the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court, therefore, the appellants-claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation.
9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has submitted that the appellants are not entitled for enhancement in compensation since the learned Tribunal after considering all the factual aspects of the matter awarded a just and reasonable compensation.
10. I have given my earnest consideration to the rival contentions of the parties and scanned the matter carefully.
11. The manner in which the accident occurred is not disputed. This appeal has been filed only questioning quantum of compensation, hence there is no need for any discussion on the question of negligence.
12. The age and multiplier as determined by the learned Tribunal is also unquestioned.
13. The learned Tribunal after elaborately discussing the factual aspects awarded a sum of Rs. 12,02,947/- for loss of income, Rs. 15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 70,000/- for spousal, parental and Filial consortium and arrived at a total compensation of Rs. 12,87,947/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filin
The court emphasized adherence to Supreme Court guidelines for calculating compensation, particularly regarding future prospects and conventional heads, leading to a modified award of Rs. 16,67,400.
Court re-assessed compensation based on minimum wage standards and future prospects for a deceased housewife, enhancing the total award to Rs. 9,95,100/.
Compensation for a housewife must reflect her invaluable contribution and adhere to minimum wage standards, with adjustments for disability and future prospects.
Compensation for wrongful death must factor in age, occupation, and income, adhering to established legal principles for award enhancement.
The court considered the deceased's age, income, and future prospects to determine the enhanced compensation.
The court applied the principles of notional income, future prospects, and loss assessment to determine the enhanced compensation for the deceased's death due to a road accident.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to modify and enhance compensation awarded by the Tribunal based on considerations such as the deceased's avocation, income, ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.