The income of the deceased should be assessed as per the salary certificate duly proved by witness, in the absence of any clinching evidence on record.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4488/2016

1. Smt Santosh Devi wife of Rameshwar

2. Abhishek Son of Rameshwar

3. Smt. Moongi Devi Wife of Baluram

4. Baluram Son of Ram Dev

All resident of Dhani Randheera, Village Late Ka Bas, Tehsil

Shahpura, District Jaipur. Appellant No.2 is minor through His

Natural Guardian Mother Santosh Devi W/o Rameshwar.

---Claimants-Appellants

Versus

1. Ramesh Kumar Saini son of Kaluram, resident of Dabar

Mohalla, Ward No.17, Shahpura, District Jaipur.

2. Rakesh Kumar Son of Prem Prakash Tailor, Resident of Ward

No.7, Near Meetha Kuwa, Shahpura, District Jaipur (Owner)

3. Shri Ram General Insurance Company Ltd. through Manager,

E-8, RIICO Sitapura, Jaipur (Insurance Company)

----Non Claimant/Respondents

For Appellant(s)

:

Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Ritesh Jain, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

ORDER RESERVED ON :: 05.01.2023

ORDER PRONOUNCED ON :: 10

.01.2023

Claimants/Appellants (for short ‘claimants’) have filed the

present appeal challenging the award daterd 03.06.2016 passed

by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal Shahpura, District Jaipur (for

short ‘the Tribunal’) in Claim Case No.268/2012 titled as Smt.

Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ramesh Kumar Saini & Ors. seeking

enhancement of compensations.

(2 of 4)

[CMA-4488/2016]

Brief facts of the claim petition is that on 12.09.2012

deceased Rameshwar-husband of the claimant-Smt. Santosh Devi

was going to Shahpura Government Hospital alongwith his uncle’s

son Kailash and taking food for his Bhabhi who was admitted in

the said hospital. At 7:15 PM near BSNL office, Tempo Trax No.RJ-

32-T-0314 being driven by its driver rashly and negligently hit the

Rameshwar, due to which Rameshwar had sustained grievous

injuries. He was admitted in the hospital and during treatment, he

died on 18.09.2012. FIR was lodged at Police Station Shahpura.

Claimants sought compensation by way claim petition before the

Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties, awarded

Rs.10,02,768/- as compensation.

Learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the

Tribunal has erred in considering the income of deceased as per

minimum wages of Rs.3,510/-. Learned counsel for the claimants

submitted that claimants had produced the salary certificate of

deceased as Ex.15. Learned counsel for the claimants also

submitted that the said certificate was duly proved by witness

AW3-Sube Singh. Learned counsel for the claimants also

submitted that the Tribunal committed an error by not considering

the salary certificate. He also submitted that once the salary

certificate of the deceased was duly proved, there was no need of

filing accounts and income statement of the firm. Learned counsel

for the claimants also submitted that deceased was working as

Granite Cutting Machine Operator and he was earning Rs.9,500/-

per month. So, appeal filed by the claimants be allowed and the

judgment & award dated 03.06.2016 passed by the Tribunal needs

to be modified.

(3 of 4)

[CMA-4488/2016]

Learned counsel for the claimants has placed reliance upon

the following judgments : (1) Mahammed Siddique & Anr. Vs.

National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. in Civil Appeal

No.79/2020 decided on 08.01.2020 and (2) Rajwati @ Rajjo

& Ors. Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. in

Civil Appeal No.8179/2022 decided on 09.12.2022.

Learned counsel for the respondent(s) has opposed the

arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimants and

submitted that the Tribunal has rightly observed that claimants

failed to prove the income of deceased as Rs.9,500/- per month.

So, the Tribunal rightly calculated the amount of compensation as

per Minimum Wages Act. Learned counsel for the respondent(s)

also submitted that the Tribunal wrongly allowed 50% as loss of