Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 392 (RAJ)

Santosh Devi v. Shiv Dayal

2012-02-09

NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN

body2012
JAIN-I, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, arguments were heard and the appeal is being disposed off finally. 3. The claimants have preferred this misc. appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajgarh, District Alwar(for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dt. 7.6.2007 in respect of death of Late Shri Babu Lal, who died in an accident arising out of motor vehicle on 13.05.2006. The Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.3,53,400/- in the following heads: 1. Loss of income Rs. 3,26,400/- 2. Funeral Expenses Rs. 2,000/- 3. Loss of consortium Rs. 10,000/- 4. Loss of love & affection to parents of deceased : 5000x2 Rs. 10,000/- 5. Loss of love & affection to son of deceased Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs. 3,53,400/- 4. Submission of learned counsel for the appellants is only with regard to income of the deceased. He submitted that as per evidence of the claimants, the deceased was driver and he was getting salary of Rs. 5,000/- per month and was also earning Rs. 3,000/- per month as agriculture income, therefore, he was earning Rs. 8,000/- per month, whereas the Tribunal assessed income of the deceased only as Rs. 80/- per day, i.e. Rs. 2,400/- per month. He further submitted that since deceased was driver, therefore, at least he should have been treated as skilled labour and his income should have been treated as Rs. 100/- per day, therefore, amount of compensation be enhanced treating income of the deceased as Rs. 100/- per day, i.e. Rs. 3,000/- per month. So far as multiplier applied by the Tribunal for calculating the amount under the head of loss of income is concerned, the same has not been disputed. The compensation awarded under other heads has also not been disputed by learned counsel for the appellants. Counsel for appellants also submitted that interest on determined compensation is payable, therefore, condition put by Tribunal that in case remaining compensation is not paid within two months, then interest will be paid, is not proper. Hence, interest may also be awarded. 5. The compensation awarded under other heads has also not been disputed by learned counsel for the appellants. Counsel for appellants also submitted that interest on determined compensation is payable, therefore, condition put by Tribunal that in case remaining compensation is not paid within two months, then interest will be paid, is not proper. Hence, interest may also be awarded. 5. Learned counsel for the Respondent No. 4, submitted that there is no evidence on behalf of the appellants with regard to income of the deceased, therefore, income assessed by the Tribunal appears to be just and reasonable, therefore, no case for interference is made out. So far as interest part is concerned, he does not dispute that interest is payable. 6. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned award. 7. There is no dispute between the parties that the appellants adduced the evidence with regard to income of the deceased. A.W. 1, Smt. Santosh Devi has stated on oath that her husband was earning Rs. 8,000/- per month, i.e. Rs. 5,000/- per month as salary being driver and Rs. 3,000/- per month from agriculture. There is no evidence in rebuttal in this regard by the respondents. In these circumstances, I find force in the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants to treat the income of the deceased as Rs. 100/- per day, as he was a driver and it can easily be assumed that he was earning at least Rs. 3,000/- per month, therefore, treating the income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- per month and after deducting one-third for personal expenses of the deceased and by applying the same multiplier of 17, as applied by the Tribunal, the compensation under the head of loss of income is assessed as Rs. 4,08,000/-, i.e. 3000-1/3rd for personal expenses =2000x12x17=Rs. 4,08,000/-. The compensation under other heads has not been challenged, therefore, the same is upheld. Thus, total compensation is enhanced from Rs. 3,53,400/- to Rs. 4,35,000/-. 8. So far as interest on compensation is concerned, submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that it may be awarded @ 9% per annum from the date of application, whereas learned counsel for Respondent No. 4 submitted that it may be awarded @ 7% per annum. There is no dispute between parties that interest is payable on determined compensation. So far as interest on compensation is concerned, submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that it may be awarded @ 9% per annum from the date of application, whereas learned counsel for Respondent No. 4 submitted that it may be awarded @ 7% per annum. There is no dispute between parties that interest is payable on determined compensation. The dispute is only in respect of rate of interest. After considering the matter, I allow the prayer of learned counsel for Respondent No. 4 in this regard and interest on compensation is awarded @ 7% per annum from the date of application till the actual date of realisation of the amount of compensation. It is further made clear that whatever amount has been paid by the respondents will be adjusted and remaining amount will be paid within a period of two months, as prayed by learned counsel for Respondent No. 4. 9. In view of above discussions, the appeal is partly allowed. Impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified to the above extent. 10. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.