Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1190 (RAJ)

General Manager, RSTC v. Ambavi

2012-05-09

VINEET KOTHARI

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - The aforesaid two appeals have been filed by the R.S.R.T.C. against the award dated 1.2.1999 deciding Claim Case No. 507/1998 Smt. Logri W/o Ramlal Gamed & Ors. v. Prabhu Lal & Anr. and Claim Case No. 508/1999 Smt. Ambavi W/o Durga Shankar Gameti whereby the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udaipur has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,81,600/- in both the claim petitions separately for the death of Ramlal and Durga Shankar. 2. On 27.8.1993 at about 6 P.M. in evening near Barkat Colony, Salumbar, R.S.R.T.C. Bus No. RJ-14-P-2534 being driven in a rash and negligent manner by Prabhu Lal hit the two persons going on moped, namely, Ram Lal Gameti and Durga Shankar Gameti resulting in their death on the spot. 3. The claim petitions were filed against the appellant R.S.R.T.C. for Rs. 7,23,884/- and Rs. 6,94,720/- respectively. Both the deceased were class IV servants of the State Government, one in PHED and another in Excise Department. 4. The learned Tribunal after considering the evidence on record has allowed the claim petition and awarded the claim to the extent of Rs. 1,81,600/- while deciding Claim Case No. 507/1998 and Rs. 1,81,600/-, same compensation for Claim Case No. 508/1998. 5. The learned Tribunal while deciding the claims determined the compensation on the basis of their monthly income of Rs. 1652/- per month and after deducting l/3rd for the personal expenses, applying multiplier of 13, looking to the age of the deceased persons of 27 years, awarded the said compensation. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant- R.S.R.T.C. Mr. S.R. Paliwal made feeble efforts, drawing attention of the Court towards the site plan that on account of sounding of horn, the deceased persons going on a Hero Puch moped lost control and feel under the type of the R.S.R.T.C. bus and therefore, were crushed. He submitted that there was no rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of R.S.R.T.C. bus. He also opposed any enhancement in compensation as one of the claimants only have filed Cross Objection No. 7/2003-Smt. Ambavi & Anr. v. Prabhu Lal & Ors. , whereas other claimants, namely, Smt. Logari & Ors. have not filed any cross-objection seeking enhancement of the compensation amount. 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent-claimants Mr. Sanjay Mathur supported the impugned judgment and award. v. Prabhu Lal & Ors. , whereas other claimants, namely, Smt. Logari & Ors. have not filed any cross-objection seeking enhancement of the compensation amount. 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent-claimants Mr. Sanjay Mathur supported the impugned judgment and award. He also submitted that the compensation amount under the impugned award needs to be enhanced suitably in both the cases as the learned Tribunal while awarding the compensation has not taken into account the future increase of income as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verina (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.- MACD 2009 (SC) 353 . 8. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that there is no force in the appeals filed by the R.S.R.T.C. A perusal of the site plan itself shows that near a busy residential colony known as Barkat Colony on the main Highway, the bus screeched for nearly 70 ft., dragging the dead bodies of two persons on the left hand side of the road itself. From the site plan, it does not appear to be a case of any rash and negligent driving on the part of the deceased driver of the Moped. The very fact that tyre marks on the road as per the site plan were found for a distance of 70 fts indicates that the bus in question was being driven at the very' high speed in a very rash and negligent manner and upon coming to know of accident and dead bodies under the tyre of the said bus, the driver-respondent No. 1 sought to apply its break and stopped only after 70 ft. This Court cannot appreciate the driving of R.S.R.T.C. bus at such a high speed on a road near a residential colony known as Barkat Colony. Therefore, as far as findings of learned Tribunal about the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver of R.S.R.T.C. is concerned, the said findings deserve to be affirmed and does not call for any interference by this Court on the basis of evidence on record. Accordingly, the appeal of the R.S.R.T.C. to that extent deserves to be dismissed. 9. As far as enhancement in compensation is concerned. Accordingly, the appeal of the R.S.R.T.C. to that extent deserves to be dismissed. 9. As far as enhancement in compensation is concerned. This Court is of the opinion that the case calls for enhancement of compensation awarded by the impugned award dated 1.2.1999 for both the deaths. Future prospects or increase in the income of deceased, who were of the age of 27 years have not been taken into account. Both the deceased were Class IV Government servants and their future prospects of increase in income on account of Pay Commission recommendations is also undoubted. The decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra) was also not available at the time when the learned Tribunal passed the impugned award, in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down as thumb rule that 50% of increase in pay at the time of death can be taken into account for determining the just and fair compensation if age of deceased is below 40 years. Therefore, irrespective of fact that LR's of deceased Ramlal Gameti, Smt. Logri and another have not filed any cross-objections seeking enhancement of compensation, however other claimants Smt. Ambabi & Anr. in Claim Case No. 508/1998 have filed such cross-objections seeking enhancement, this Court is of the opinion that claimants for both the deaths in questions deserve same treatment and their claim deserves to be enhanced by 50% in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra) 10. According while dismissing the appeals filed by the R.S.R.T.C., the cross-objections of the claimants in one case and in another case, even though cross-objections have not been filed compensation amount is enhanced and cross objections are allowed treating both the claimants at same footing. The claim awarded by learned Tribunal is accordingly hereby enhanced by 50% of Rs. 1,81,600/- i.e. Rs. 90,800/-. Such enhanced amount of Rs. 90,800/- would be payable with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of award i.e. 1.2.1999 till the date of payment. The enhanced amount may be paid by R.S.R.T.C. within a period of 3 months from today and same may be deposited and disbursed to the claimants in same proportion and manner as the awarded sum of Rs. 1,81,600/- has been disbursed to the claimants. 11. The enhanced amount may be paid by R.S.R.T.C. within a period of 3 months from today and same may be deposited and disbursed to the claimants in same proportion and manner as the awarded sum of Rs. 1,81,600/- has been disbursed to the claimants. 11. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the R.S.R.T.C. are dismissed and the cross-objections of the claimants are allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.Appeal No. 522/1999 and 517/1999 dismissed/Cross-objection No. 7/2002 party allowed. *******