[2025:RJ-JP:19471]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 578/2022

1. Prabhudayal Saini S/o Chauth Mal, Aged About 68 Years, Resident Of Gram Indok, P.s. Malakheda, Distt. Alwar.

2. Teeja Devi W/o Prabhudayal, Aged About 63 Years, Resident Of Gram Indok, P.s. Malakheda, Distt. Alwar.

3. Santosh Saini W/o Raju Saini, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Gram Indok, P.s. Malakheda, Distt. Alwar.

4. Ekta Saini D/o Raju Saini, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Gram Indok, P.s. Malakheda, Distt. Alwar.

5. Rahul Saini S/o Raju Saini, Aged About 18 Years, Resident Of Gram Indok, P.s. Malakheda, Distt. Alwar.

6. Ravindra Saini S/o Raju Saini, Aged About 17 Years, Minor Through His Natural Guardian/mother Smt. Santosh Saini.

Resident Of Gram Indok, P.S. Malakheda, Distt. Alwar.

7. Ashuman Saini S/o Raju Saini, Aged About 15 Years, Minor Through His Natural Guardian/mother Smt. Santosh Saini.

Resident Of Gram Indok, P.s. Malakheda, Distt. Alwar.

----Appellants Versus

1. Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Through Chairman, Jvvnl, Ram Mandir Marg, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. Executive Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Alwar, Raj.

3. Assistant Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Malakheda, Distt. Alwar (Raj.).

----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : None present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

08/05/2025 :

The present first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred on behalf of the claimants- appellants (for short ‘the appellants’) against the impugned judgment &

decree dt.13.04.2022 passed by the Court of ld. District Judge, Alwar, in Civil Misc. Case (Fatal Accident) No.45/2019, whereby ld. Trial Court had partly allowed the claim petition & awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.12,67,784/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum in favour of the claimants-appellants on account of death of one Raju Saini @

Rajkumar Saini, who died on 21.09.2018 due to electrocution.

Learned counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants contends that at the time of alleged incident, the deceased was 35- years of age, working as an agriculturist, milk-vendor & used to earn @ Rs.15,000/- per month. Counsel further contends that ld. Trial Court, has wrongly considered the income of the deceased @ Rs.213/- per day for 26-days, whereas the income of the deceased should have been assessed @ Rs.213/- per day for 30-days. Counsel contends that the ld. Trial Court has wrongly awarded a lump sum amount of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium, whereas it should be Rs.40,000/- per claimant and, hence, the judgment & decree of the ld. Trial Court may be modified.

In support of his submissions, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, in Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanuram & Others, (2018) 18 SCC 130 and in New India Assurance Company & Others Vs. Somwati & Others, MANU/SC/0674/2020, wherein reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely ‘loss of estate’, ‘loss of consortium’ and ‘funeral expenses’ held to be Rs.15,000/-, 40,000/- each claimant & Rs.15,000/- respectively. The parents, wife and children of the deceased are also entitled to get the award under the head of ‘loss of consortium’.

Today, no one is present on behalf of the respondents.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, considered the submissions made at bar, gone through the judgment & decree passed by ld. Trial Court & perused the judgments cited herein above.

It is an admitted position that the appellants failed to adduce the cogent evidence that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month but the ld. Trial Court erred in decreed the lump sum amount of Rs.12,67,784/- as compensation.

Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Laxmidhar Nayak &

Others Vs. Jugalkishore & Others, 2018 (1) R.A.R. 45 S.C. an