[2025:RJ-JD:43222]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 3057/2017

1. Lrs Of Purakh Singh S/o Shri Anad Singh.

1/A. Anada Singh S/o Shri Jawar Singh, Aged about 69 years, R/o Village Gumansinghpura, Tehsil Shergarh, District Jodhpur.

----Appellant Versus

1. Narendra Singh S/o Sh. Ganga Singh R/o Udhgan, P.S.

Paldi, District Sirohi at present residing at Shergarh, Tehsil Shergarh, District Jodhpur.

2. Gopikishan S/o Chhaganlal, R/o Bank Road, Shergarh, Tehsil Shergarh, District Jodhpur.

3. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Office, Maker Tower, Nityanand Road, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. Insurance Company Of The Bolero Jeep No. Rj19-Ua-2446 Police No.

2502902311101432 Period 28.11.2010 To 27.11.2011 ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Praveen Choudhary.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishal Singhal (for respondent-

Insurance Company).

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

25/09/2025

1. The instant misc. appeal has been filed by the claimant/appellant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘the Act of 1988’) challenging the validity of judgment/award dated 24.05.2017 passed by the learned Judge Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (First), District Jodhpur (“Tribunal”) in M.A.C Case Number 93/2012 (941/14) whereby the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition of the claimant and awarded an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.4,33,000/- in total with the interest @ 9% p.a. while fastening the liability upon respondents jointly and severally.

2. Brief facts of the case are that On 03.11.2011, at about 6:00 A.M., deceased-Smt. Kamla Kanwar was going towards her agricultural field situated near village Gumansinghpura. At that time, a Bolero Jeep bearing registration No. RJ-19-UA-2446, driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1, came from Shergarh side and hit her. She sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. A claim petition was initially filed by her husband Purkha Singh, but during pendency he expired. Thereafter, her father-in-law, the present appellant, was brought on record as dependent. The appellant pleaded before the learned Tribunal, that the deceased was a homemaker, contributing substantially in agricultural activities, used to earn Rs.5,000/- per month. The respondents denied liability to pay quantum of compensation to the appellant. The Insurance Company pleaded that the accident was caused by another Bolero bearing No.RJ-19-UA-2872 and further contended breach of policy conditions.

3. The learned Tribunal, after appreciating evidence, held the driver of Bolero No.RJ-19-UA-2446, negligent, and awarded Rs.4,08,000/- towards loss of dependency and Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses, totaling Rs.4,33,000/-, deducting interim award of Rs.50,000/- and being aggrieved of such meager amount awarded by the learned Tribunal, the present misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month, without reference to minimum wages, though as per settled law, the notional income of a homemaker cannot be undervalued. He submits that the learned Tribunal failed to add future prospects, whereas as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680, an addition of 40% is required for a deceased below 40 years of age. Further the learned Tribunal deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses, while in the case of a married woman with only one dependent, deduction ought to be 1/2, as per the judgment in the case of Sarla Verma v. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 121. He further submits that the learned Tribunal has failed to award compensation under non-pecuniary heads viz. loss of consortium and loss of estate and has awarded a meager sum of Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses, which deserves enhancement as per the principles laid down in Pranay Sethi (supra).

5. In support of his contentions, learned couns