Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 2708 (RAJ)

Sardar Singh v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

2008-12-15

NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN

body2008
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Admit. With the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties, the appeal was heard finally and is being disposed of. 3. The claimant-appellants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation in respect of death of their daughter Kumari Sapna aged about 8 years who died in motor accident took place on 17.9.2007 and being aggrieved with the impugned award dated 26.5.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dholpur, whereby the learned learned Tribunal has awarded a total amount of compensation of Rs.1,55,000/- with interest @ 7 1/2% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application till the date of payment in their favour. 4. The only contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that this Court in Smt. Malti & 52 Others v. M.K. Vasu and 52 Ors (2008 (1) WLC (Raj.)589) has awarded a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- as compensation in respect of death of a child aged about 5 to 10 years, therefore, this case is fully covered by the aforesaid judgment of this Court and as such the amount of compensation may be enhanced to Rs.1,80,000/-. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly and frankly admits that the present case is fully covered by the judgment of this Court in Smt. Malti's case (supra). 6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal. 7. This Court in Smt. Malti's case (supra) in para No.11 held as under:- "11. In case title Manju Devi and another v. Musafir Paswan and Another 2005(1) TAC 609 , while determining compensation on account of death of a 13 years old child, the Supreme Court considered the judgment delivered in case title U.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Trilok Chandra reported in 1996 ACJ 831 and applied the multiplier of 15 as per II Schedule annexed with the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 taking notional income of Rs.15,000/- being a non-earning person and awarded compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- observing as under : "In the case of U.P. State Road Trans. Corpn. v. Trilok Chandra, 1996 ACJ 831 : 1996 (2) TAC 286 (SC) , it has been held by this Court that there should be no departure from the multiplier method on the ground that payment being made is just compensation. Corpn. v. Trilok Chandra, 1996 ACJ 831 : 1996 (2) TAC 286 (SC) , it has been held by this Court that there should be no departure from the multiplier method on the ground that payment being made is just compensation. It has been held that the multiplier method must be accepted method for determining and ensuring payment of just compensation as it is the method which brings uniformity and certainty to awards made all over the country. In view of this authority, it will have to be held that the award of compensation had to be made by the multiplier method. As set out in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, for a boy of 13 years of age, a multiplier of 15 would have to be applied. As per the Second Schedule, he being a non-earning person, a sum of Rs.15,000/- must be taken as the income. Thus, the compensation comes to Rs.2,25,000/-." With regard to compensation for the victim non-earning children, the Apex Court has extensively dealt with these aspects in case title New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Satender and Ors (supra). Therefore, these appeals are disposed of holding the claimants entitled to the following compensation. (i) The claimants of the victim child in the age group upto 5 years shall be entitled to compensation to a sum of Rs. One lac. (ii) The claimants of victim child in the age group of 5 to 10 years shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,80,000/-. (iii) The claimants of the victim child in the age group of 10 to 15 years shall be entitled to compensation to a sum of Rs.2,25,000/-." 8. Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that deceased Kumari Sapna was 8 years old and present case is fully covered by judgment of this Court as referred above and the amount of compensation is liable to be enhanced upto a sum of Rs.1,80,000/-. 9. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified. The amount of compensation of Rs.1,55,000/- is enhanced to Rs.1,80,000/- (One Lac Eighty Thousand). The enhanced amount shall also carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of claim application i.e. 24.9.2007, till the date of payment. No order as to costs.Appeal allowed. *******