Compensation calculation for motor vehicle accidents must include all components of income, including house rent allowance, to ensure just compensation.

JUDGMENT :

GANESH RAM MEENA, J.

1. The present civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants/ claimants under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act of 1988’) against the judgment and award dated 08.09.2022 passed by the Court of learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shahpura (Addl. District & Sessions Judge, No.1, Shahpura, Jaipur District, Jaipur) [for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’] in Claim Petition No.197/2017, Smt. Kamlesh & Ors. Vs. Mahesh Kumar & Ors., whereby the Claims Tribunal while partly allowing the claim petition awarded Rs.48,29,504/- as a compensation in favour of the appellants/ claimants.

2. The facts borne out from the pleadings are that the appellants/claimants filed a claim petition under section 166/140 of the Act of 1988 read with Rule 10(2) of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rules, 1990 (for short ‘the Rules of 1990’) before the Claims Tribunal mentioning therein that on 27.08.2017 at about 8-9 deceased Brijmohan was returning from Shahpura to his home at Ghashipura from motorcycle bearing number RJ-52-SB-7129, and as he reached near Rajpura Culvert (Puliya) on National Highway No.8, one Trailer bearing number RJ-52-GA-2635 which was being run in front of the motorcycle by its driver, in a careless manner all of a sudden without giving any indicator or without any ignition applied the break and stopped the trailer on the center of the road as a result of which due to the darkness the motorcycle of Brijmohan hit from the trailer which resulted sustaining of grievous injuries by Brijmohan on his head and body. Brijmohan was taken to Shahpura Hospital but because of his serious condition he was referred to SMS Hospital, Jaipur, where during the course of his treatment he died. It has also been mentioned in the claim petition that due to the mistake and carelessness of the driver of the trailer, the accident took place. The appellants/ claimants in lump sum claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.1,91,30,000/-.

It has also been submitted in the claim petition that regarding the said accident an FIR No.390/2017 was registered at Police Station Shahpura for the offences under sections 279 and 304A IPC. After investigation the police submitted the charge-sheet against Mahesh Kumar (driver of the Trailer) for the offences under sections 279 and 304A IPC.

3. The respondents/ non-claimants filed written statement of denial.

4. On the basis of pleadings of both the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed five issues.

5. The appellants/ claimants to prove their case in oral evidence examined two witnesses and exhibited certain documents. The respondents/ non-claimants neither produced any oral nor any documentary evidence.

6. After hearing both the sides, the Claims Tribunal passed the impugned judgment and award dated 08.09.2022. Hence, this civil misc. appeal.

7. Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma, counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submits that the Claims Tribunal has failed to consider the facts that the deceased at the time of accident was 42 years of age and he was a Government Servant as he was Postman in Postal Department and his monthly income was Rs.34,880/- but the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in assessing the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.28,080/-. Counsel has also raised an issue that the Claims Tribunal while assessing the income for computing the compensation under the head of loss of income has taken into consideration the salary /income of the deceased after making deduction of the house rent allowance of Rs.2,016/- .

8. Counsel submits that as per the settled law, the house rent allowance is a part of the salary/