Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 221 (RAJ)

Shanti Devi v. Dhanna Ram

2003-02-11

JAGAT SINGH

body2003
JUDGMENT 1. :- Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This misc. civil appeal has been filed on behalf of the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 23.1.1990 passed by the Judge. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Jodhpur by which, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 54,000/- only for the accidental death of Bagda Ram aged 35 years who has left behind four sons and one widow and was doing the business of milk seller and was earning Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 13,000/- per year. The accidental death took place on 15.12.1983 at 3.00 P.M. when Bagda Ram was standing at Bus Stand Dangiawas, a truck No. RJK 7878 came with a great speed from the side of Jodhpur, which was driven rashly and negligently by the driver, dashed against Bagda Ram with violent force resulting which, he succumbed to the injuries instantaneously. In the above accident, one Dhanna Ram also received injuries. Both of them filed claim petitions against the driver, registered owner of the truck as also the insurance company. 3. Written submissions were filed on behalf of the registered owner as also the insurance company. The driver of the truck inspite of the service did not appear before the Court. Numerous issues were framed on the pleadings of the parties. 4. PW-1 Shanti widow of the deceased has examined herself and so also Hari Ram PW-2, eye witness of the occurrence Mangi Lal PW-3 and Dr. Jamna Das Bora PW-4 were examined in support of the claim petition. Certified copies of the documents prepared by the Investigating Officer were also produced. In rebuttal, no evidence documentary or occular was adduced. 5. Before the learned Tribunal, it had been proved that at the time of death, Bagda Ram was 35 years of age and he was running in good heath and was a milk vendor. Though he was also having 1/4th share in the ancestor land of 300 Bighas in the name of his father but the main income was from milk selling. There was evidence that Bagda Ram had four buffaloes and eight cows whose milk, he used to sell. One buffalo used to give 12 kilos of milk and one cow gave 6 kilos of milk in a day. There was evidence that Bagda Ram had four buffaloes and eight cows whose milk, he used to sell. One buffalo used to give 12 kilos of milk and one cow gave 6 kilos of milk in a day. Inspite of the evidence, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that after deducting the necessary expenses and maintenance of cows, the net profit was of Rs. 450/- per month. After deducing ⅓rd amount to be spent upon him with the dependency was adjudged as Rs. 300/- per month and after applying the multiplier of 15, Rs. 54,000/- was awarded. No amount was awarded towards consortium and love and affection. The liability to pay was fixed on both the insured as well as the insurance company. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants while relying on the judgment the case of General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Susamma Thomas and Ors., 1994 ACJ page 1 - submitted that the future earning prospects of the deceased have not been taken into consideration and the compensation awarded was not just. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the insurance company has supported the impugned award. Learned counsel for the insured has submitted that the deceased was not employed anywhere and the Court has rightly deducted the maintenance amount of cows and buffaloes and in the year 1983, he has rightly come to the conclusion that the monthly income of the deceased could not have exceeded Rs. 450/- per month. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made at the bar. 8. The compensation should be just which is a term of very wide amplitude. It does not admit payment of lip service. The Court should bear in mind that its duty is to award just compensation. The provision is intended to put the dependents in the position they would have been had the deceased been alive. Similarly, the expression "compensation" means anything given to make things equivalent or to make awards of loss, recompense, remuneration or pay as has been held by the Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat v. Shanti Lal Mangal Das, AIR 1969 Supreme Court 634 . 9. To award just compensation, there cannot be any exact or uniform rule of measuring the value of the loss suffered or the extent of damages by any precise mathematical calculations. 9. To award just compensation, there cannot be any exact or uniform rule of measuring the value of the loss suffered or the extent of damages by any precise mathematical calculations. Such an amount can be calculated by reference to the facts and peculiar circumstances of each case. Similarly, the determination of quantum must be liberal not niggardly since the law values life and limb in generous scales. The measure of damages should be such so as to enable even a tort feasor to say that he had amply adhored for his mis-adventure. 10. In assessing damages in fatal accident cases, the compensation should be calculated so as to allow for the increasing cost in a depreciating currency and a Judge cannot shut his eyes to the inflationary trend and the fact that the rupees has considerably gone down in value. 11. Keeping the above principles in mind, the Tribunal, should have awarded the just compensation for the death of a young man of 35 years of age, who has left behind a widow and 4 minor sons. When there was enough occular evidence that the deceased was running a business of milk selling and was having 4 buffaloes and 8 cows and was earning Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 15,000/- per year. The learned Tribunal has taken Rs. 12,000/- as gross income and has made deductions in it for the maintenance of the cows. The Tribunal was also not oblivious of the fact that the income of the deceased would have increased in the years to come and even no amount was awarded for consortium and love and affection. 12. It can be deducted from the impugned award that the Court was very niggardly in awarding compensation. When there was no evidence in rebuttal and when in the cross-examination of the three witnesses produced on behalf of the claimants, nothing substantial affecting their testimony has crept in, the Tribunal should have come to the conclusion that the annual income was round about Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 13,000/-. Taking the above figure to be Rs. 1,000/- per month and ⅓rd amount may be deducted for the maintenance of the deceased himself, the net income to be spent on the claimants come to Rs. 667/-. This amount may also be taken in round figure to be Rs. 600/- per month which comes to Rs. 7,200/- per year. 13,000/-. Taking the above figure to be Rs. 1,000/- per month and ⅓rd amount may be deducted for the maintenance of the deceased himself, the net income to be spent on the claimants come to Rs. 667/-. This amount may also be taken in round figure to be Rs. 600/- per month which comes to Rs. 7,200/- per year. Even without taking into future prospects of earning, the just compensation as per Schedule-II of the Act of 1988. By applying multiplier of 17, would be Rs. 1,22,400/- (7200 x 17). Further Rs. 15,000/- is allowed towards consortium and love and affection and the net figure comes to Rs. 1,37,400/-. Interest at the rate of 12% as awarded by the Tribunal is upheld. At that rate, the interest shall also be payable on the enhanced amount. 13. Consequently, there is merit in this appeal and the same is accepted as stated above. The liability to pay to above amount is jointly on the insured as well as on the insurance company. The Insurance Company shall make payment of the above amount within three months from today.Appeal Allowed. *******