Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1091 (RAJ)

Chhoga Lal v. Mohini Roopani

2009-04-21

GUMAN SINGH

body2009
Hon'ble SINGH, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Both these appeals being CMA No.761/1998 (claim case No.131/1994) and CMA No.762/1998 (claim case no. 197/1995) have been preferred on behalf of appellants-claimants for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur city, Jaipur vide judgment dated 25.4.1998 whereby in claim case no. 131/94, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded by way of compensation for the death of a child caused in the accident and in claim case no. 197/95, sum of Rs.35,000/- was awarded by way of compensation for the injuries caused in the accident resulting into 5% disability. 3. The challenge in the appeals pertains to quantum of compensation only. C.M.A. No.761/1998 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side whereas it should have been enhanced to Rs.1,80,000/-by treating the age of the child to be more than 5 years as per decision of this court in Malti (Smt.) and Ors. vs. M.K.Vasu and Ors.-MACD 2008(1) Raj. 105 wherein the category of the children as per age has been fixed for awarding compensation on the basis of ratio indicated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Satender and Ors.-2007(1) SC,138 = RLW 2007(3) SC 2126. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the Tribunal and submitted that the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration evidence adduced during inquiry and has awarded adequate compensation and calls for no interference. It is also submitted that even according to the judgment of this court in Malti's case (supra), referred to above, Rs.1,00,000/- has been fixed for awarding compensation to the children upto the age category of 5 years and, as such, adequate compensation has been awarded. 6. After hearing the rival contentions, and going through the award as also record of the case, it is revealed that the age of the child in this case is stated to be 5 years and the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been fixed for the children upto the age of 5 years as per decision of Coordinate Bench of this court based on the ratio indicated by the Apex Court in Satender's case (supra), as such, amount awarded is adequate and the calls for no interference. 7. 7. Accordingly, appeal of the appellants is dismissed with no order as to costs. C.M.A. No.762/1998 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal has awarded sum of Rs.25,000/- by way of compensation for loss of earning which is the minimum amount to be paid under no fault liability of the M.V. Act while the learned Tribunal should have calculated the loss of earning by taking second schedule to the M.V. Act to be the guidelines. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the Tribunal and submitted that the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration evidence adduced during inquiry and has awarded adequate compensation and calls for no interference. 10. After hearing the rival contentions, and going through the award as also record of the case, it is revealed that additional sum of Rs.13,500/- deserves to be awarded over and above with sum of Rs.25,000/- as against the loss of earning on account of 5% disability sustained in the accident. 11. Accordingly, appeal of the appellants is partly allowed and the Award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified to the extent that the appellants shall get a sum of Rs.13,500/- by way of additional enhanced compensation from the date of appeal i.e. 17.7.98, with 6% interest to be paid within three months. Thereafter interest shall be paid @9% per annum. The rest of the terms of award shall remain unchanged. Record be sent forthwith.