Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 2188 (RAJ)

Ram Pal v. Amarjeet Sharma

2007-11-15

P.S.ASOPA

body2007
JUDGMENT 1. - The instant appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bharatpur, dated 22.1.2004 in Claim Case No. 68 of 2001 whereby the Claims Tribunal partly allowed the claim application and passed an award of Rs. 1,92,000/- in favour of the appellants-claimants. 2. In brief, the facts giving rise to this appeal are that in a road accident which occurred on 26.8.2000 due to negligence of the respondent No. 2. When deceased was grazing her buffalo and was sitting near road side; suddenly a truck No. RJ 14-G 5568 which was being driven by the respondent No. 2 rashly and negligently resulted in death of Puniya Devi. Her legal heirs have filed the instant appeal for enhancement of compensation amount. The dependency was taken to be Rs. 1,000/- then the amount was determined as Rs. 1,000 x 12 x 15 = Rs. 1,80,000/-. Rs. 10,000/- have been awarded towards loss of love and affection. 3. Submissions of the counsel for the appellants is that the Tribunal has grossly erred in determining the notional income of the deceased as Rs. 1,500/- per month, although their case was that she was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month from sewing, weaving, etc. Although the deceased was 35 years of age, but wrongly considering the fact of age mentioned in the postmortem report, the same was taken as 42 years and further the multiplier of 15 was applied. The dependency was taken to be Rs. 1,000/- then the amount was determined as Rs. 1,000 x 12 x 15 = Rs. 1,80,000/-. Rs. 10,000/- have been awarded for loss of love and affection which is on the lower side. 4. Counsel for the appellants further submits that the Supreme Court in Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar, 2001 ACJ 1735 (SC) has considered the fact that the services rendered by the housewife towards managing the family has to be assessed as Rs. 3,000/- per month. But, in the instant case, there is no basis for only taking the income at the rate of Rs. 1,500 per month. 5. Submission of the counsel for the respondents is that Lata Wadhwa's case (supra) was the case of accidental fire in V.I.P. pandal, therefore, the same consideration will not apply in this case and the Tribunal has rightly assessed the notional income as Rs. 1,500 per month. 5. Submission of the counsel for the respondents is that Lata Wadhwa's case (supra) was the case of accidental fire in V.I.P. pandal, therefore, the same consideration will not apply in this case and the Tribunal has rightly assessed the notional income as Rs. 1,500/- per month and rightly awarded the compensation of Rs. 1,92,000/-. Alternative submission of the counsel for the respondents is that even if the family contribution is taken to be Rs. 3,000/- per month, ⅓rd deduction to be made. 6. I have gone through the record of the appeal and further considered the rival submissions of the parties. 7. It is true that the present case is of motor accident whereas the aforesaid case of Lata Wadhwa (supra) before the Apex Court was of the accidental fire in V.I.P. pandal, but still the criteria for assessing the contribution of the housewife is the same. In same view, the Tribunal ought to have assessed the contribution of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- per month towards her family as a housewife and after making the same as Rs. 36,000/- per annum further the calculation of the multiplier of 15 was required to be calculated as Rs. 3,000 x 12 x 15 = Rs. 5,40,000/-. Further, no one-third deduction can be made because only the contribution as a housewife towards the entire family was taken into consideration by the Supreme Court and not any other income from any other source. 8. Accordingly, the award is enhanced from Rs. 1,20,000/- to Rs. 5,52,000/- in total. The appellants shall also be entitled for the interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal on the enhanced amount. As regards the liability of the respondents for the enhanced amount is concerned, will be the same as held by the Tribunal. The Tribunal is free to make the distribution of enhanced amount as per its discretion for which the parties are free to file the application. 9. The appeal is allowed, as indicated above.Appeal allowed. *******