Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 10914
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 22ND OF APRIL, 2024
MISC. APPEAL No.
3416
of 20
17
Between :-
1. NANNE LODHI S/O LATE
RAMCHARAN LODHI, AGED ABOUT 55
YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOTHING
RAJESH
TIWARI
S
HOUSE
GANGASAGAR NEAR SITA RAM
AKHADA THANA MADAN MAHAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. AMOL RANI W/O NANNE
LODHI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE R/O
RAJESH
TIWARIS
HOUSE,
GANGASAGAR, NEAR SITA RAMS
AKHADA, THANA MADAN MAHAL,
DIST. JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. ANIL LIDHI S/O LATE PREM SINGH
LODHI, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: MINOR THROUGH
NATURAL GUARDIAN IE GRAND
FATHER NANNE LODHI R/O RAJESH
TIWARIS HOUSE, GANGASAGAR,
NEAR SITA RAMS AKHADA, THANA
MADAN MAHAL, DIST. JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. REKHA LODHI D/O NANNE LODHI,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O RAJESH
TIWARIS HOUSE, GANGASAGAR,
NEAR SITA RAMS AKHADA, THANA
- 2 -
MADAN MAHAL, DIST. JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
…APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI VINEET KUMAR MISRHA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAM PRASAD S/O KUDDA PRASAD
ADIWASI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
VILLAGE CHEEMADHANA THANA
DEVRI SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. AMIT JAIN CONTRACTOR S/O SHRI
DASRATHLAL, AGED ABOUT 38
YEARS, JHANKU WARD, INFRONT OF
POLICE THANA DEVRI DISTT.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.
1415 DIVISIONAL OFFICE WRIGHT
TOWN
JABALPUR
(MADHYA
PRADESH)
….RESPONDENTS
(NONE)
AND
MISC. APPEAL No.
3417
of 20
17
Between :-
1. NANNE LODHI S/O LATE
RAMCHARAN LODHI, AGED ABOUT 55
YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOTHING
RAJESH
TIWARI
S
HOUSE
GANGASAGAR NEAR SITA RAM
- 3 -
AKHADA THANA MADAN MAHAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. AMOL RANI W/O NANNE
LODHI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE R/O
RAJESH
TIWARIS
HOUSE,
GANGASAGAR, NEAR SITA RAMS
AKHADA, THANA MADAN MAHAL,
DIST. JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. ANIL LIDHI S/O LATE PREM SINGH
LODHI, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: MINOR THROUGH
NATURAL GUARDIAN IE GRAND
FATHER NANNE LODHI R/O RAJESH
TIWARIS HOUSE, GANGASAGAR,
NEAR SITA RAMS AKHADA, THANA
MADAN MAHAL, DIST. JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. REKHA LODHI D/O NANNE LODHI,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O RAJESH
TIWARIS HOUSE, GANGASAGAR,
NEAR SITA RAMS AKHADA, THANA
MADAN MAHAL, DIST. JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
…APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI VINEET KUMAR MISRHA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAM PRASAD S/O KUDDA PRASAD
ADIWASI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
VILLAGE CHEEMADHANA THANA
DEVRI SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. AMIT JAIN CONTRACTOR S/O SHRI
DASRATHLAL, AGED ABOUT 38
YEARS, JHANKU WARD, INFRONT OF
- 4 -
POLICE THANA DEVRI DISTT.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.
1415 DIVISIONAL OFFICE WRIGHT
TOWN
JABALPUR
(MADHYA
PRADESH)
….RESPONDENTS
( NONE)
MISC. APPEAL No.
3415
of 20
17
Between :-
1. NANNE LODHI S/O LATE
RAMCHARAN LODHI, AGED ABOUT 55
YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOTHING
RAJESH
TIWARI
S
HOUSE
GANGASAGAR NEAR SITA RAM
AKHADA THANA MADAN MAHAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. AMOL RANI W/O NANNE
LODHI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE R/O
RAJESH
TIWARIS
HOUSE,
GANGASAGAR, NEAR SITA RAMS
AKHADA, THANA MADAN MAHAL,
DIST. JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. ANIL LIDHI S/O LATE PREM SINGH
LODHI, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: MINOR THROUGH
NATURAL GUARDIAN IE GRAND
FATHER NANNE LODHI R/O RAJESH
TIWARIS HOUSE, GANGASAGAR,
NEAR SITA RAMS AKHADA, THANA
MADAN MAHAL, DIST. JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
- 5 -
4. REKHA LODHI D/O NANNE LODHI,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O RAJESH
TIWARIS HOUSE, GANGASAGAR,
NEAR SITA RAMS AKHADA, THANA
MADAN MAHAL, DIST. JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
…APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI VINEET KUMAR MISRHA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAM PRASAD S/O KUDDA PRASAD
ADIWASI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
VILLAGE CHEEMADHANA THANA
DEVRI SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. AMIT JAIN CONTRACTOR S/O SHRI
DASRATHLAL, AGED ABOUT 38
YEARS, JHANKU WARD, INFRONT OF
POLICE THANA DEVRI DISTT.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.
1415 DIVISIONAL OFFICE WRIGHT
TOWN
JABALPUR
(MADHYA
PRADESH)
….RESPONDENTS
( NONE)
Reserved on -22.04.2024
Pronounced on – 25.04.2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 6 -
These misc. appeals having been heard and reserved for
orders, coming on for pronouncement this day, this court
passed the following:
Vinit Kumar Mishra,
ORDER
This order will govern misc. appeal No. 3416/2017, 3415/2017 and 3417/2017 filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short “Act”) by the appellants/claimants assailing the award passed by the VI Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in claim Case No. 173/2015 on 11.08.2017.
2. Claim case No. 173/2015 was filed for death of child Sahitya Lodhi aged about 8 years, claim case No. 174/2015 for death of Sandhya Lodhi and claim case No. 175/2015 for death of Prem Singh Lodhi in road traffic accident on 11.05.2015. 2.1. In all the claim cases common facts are that on 11.05.2015 Prem Singh Lodhi with his wife Sandhya Lodhi and son Sahitya Lodhi riding on his motor cycle was going to his in-laws house at village Bijora near Dultara Tiraha at NH 26 Sagar Narsinghpur road a dumper MP 15G 2817 (offending vehicle) driven by its driver rashly and negligently hit motor cycle of Prem Singh Lodhi from rear side. All the three persons on motor cycle came under dumper and died on the spot due to injuries suffered by them. Incident was reported to police station Devri District Sagar where crime No. 162/2015 under Section 304-A was registered and investigated. Claim in all above cases claiming themselves to be the legal heirs of the deceased filed claim petitions for compensation.
3. Claim petitions were opposed by the respondents on the ground that respondent No. 1/driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid and effective driving license on the date of accident. No permit and fitness was issued for the offending vehicle. On the date of accident offending vehicle was driven by respondent No.1 without valid and effective driving license and permit and fitness of the offending vehicle which was against the terms and conditions of the insurance policy therefore, insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.
4. Learned Claims Tribunal framed various issues on the basis of the pleadings of the parties. After recording the evidence and affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. Common award for all the claim cases was passed.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants took exception to the impugned award on the ground that income of the deceaseds taken by the claims tribunal for computation of dependency amount is not in consonance with the circular issued by the Labour Department with regard to the minimum wages prevalent on the date of accident i.e. on 11.05.2015. Impugned award has also been assailed for not awarding any amount in the head of future prospects and loss of estate. Therefore, prayer has been made for enhancement of the compensation amount.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/insurance company supported the award passed by the Claims Tribunal and prayed for its dismissal of this misc. appeals.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and peruse the record.
From perusal of the impugned award, it is clear that income of the deceased Prem Singh Lodhi and Sandhya Lodhi has taken as Rs.4500/- per month without resorting the circular issued by the Labour Department with regard to the minimum wages to be paid.
8. In Sapna and Others vs. Mangilal and Another, 2021 ACJ 957, Coordinate Bench of this Court in para No.8 has held as under:- “8.Having heard the learned counsel for parties and on perusal of the record, it is noticed that the appellant had deposed before the tribunal that the deceased was earning Rs.8,000/- per month, but no document in support of which was produced. The tribunal had noted that the deceased was about 20 years of age and was a labourer, therefore, considering the minimum wages and dearness allowance for the relevant period, the tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.6000/-. No notification/circular of the concerned Labour Officer was taken note of by the tribunal while mentioning the daily wages of Rs.6000/-. The cir
