Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1027 (RAJ)

LRs of Bhagwati v. Pahar Singh

2014-04-25

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2014
Hon'ble MEHTA, J.—The instant appeal for enhancement has been preferred by the appellant claimant against the judgment cum award dated 21.9.1999 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat Camp Jaitaran in MAC No. 141/1994, whereby a total sum of Rs.85,000/- was awarded to the appellant claimant Bhagwati on account of the death of her son Ram Singh. 2. During pendency of the appeal, the appellant Smt. Bhagwati passed away and thus, her sons Laxman Singh and Jagdish and her daughters Smt. Antar Kanwar and Smt. Jeewan Kanwar were impleaded as appellants in her place as her legal heirs. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that in the morning of 24.5.1991 Ram Singh, deceased, was going towards Beawar by driving a car bearing registration No.RJ24.C.0276 on the main highway between Beawar to Pali. The driver of the truck bearing registration No.RJ21.C.0426 drove his truck rashly and negligently and collided with the car causing the death of Ram Singh, who was driving the car. An FIR No.151/94 was registered against the truck driver wherein Police filed a charge-sheet after investigation. 4. Bhagwati, the mother of Ram Singh filed the claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act mentioning therein that Ram Singh was aged 22 years on the date of the accident. He was a driver by profession and used to earn a sum of Rs.2100/- per month inclusive of the allowances by doing the said job. A total compensation of Rs.14,10,600/- was claimed under various heads. 5. The driver, owner, insurer of the truck involved in the accident and the owner as well as the insurer of the car were impleaded as non-claimants to the claim application. 6. The respondent non-claimant No.3 Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the truck in question, filed a written statement claiming that the truck was not insured in the name of Jagdish Singh. It was also pleaded that the driver of the vehicle in question was not having a valid licence to drive the vehicle. The non-claimant No.5 United India Insurance Company Limited filed a written statement and pleaded that the car driver did not drive the car rashly and negligently and thus, the insurance company was not liable to indemnify the award. 7. The non-claimant No.5 United India Insurance Company Limited filed a written statement and pleaded that the car driver did not drive the car rashly and negligently and thus, the insurance company was not liable to indemnify the award. 7. The Tribunal framed the usual issues and held that the truck driver Pahad Singh drove the truck rashly and negligently and caused the accident. The income of Ram Singh by driving the car was held to be Rs.1500/- per month. Out of that, deduction of 1/3rd was made towards personal needs and expenses. Multiplier of 5 was applied looking to the age of the mother being 70 years and accordingly, the assessment towards loss of income was made at Rs.60,000/-. A sum of Rs.25,000/- was awarded to the claimant under the head of loss of love, affection and service. Accordingly, the entitlement of the claimant was assessed at Rs.85,000/-. 8. Smt. Bhagwati filed this appeal before this Court seeking enhancement. As has been mentioned above, during the pendency of the appeal, she passed away that thus, her legal heirs, who are the siblings of the deceased, have been impleaded as appellants for pursuing the appeal. 9. Shri M.R. Choudhary and Shri M.S. Soni learned counsels appearing for the appellants submitted that after the death of their mother, the appellants are entitled to her estate and thus they are entitled to pursue the appeal. They submitted that the estate of the deceased would include the award passed by the Tribunal and thus, they are entitled to pursue the appeal as if the same was being pursued by the deceased. They urged that the Tribunal committed errors while assessing the compensation on the following points: The Tribunal erred in holding the income of the deceased to be only Rs.1500/- per month No consideration for future prospects and rise in income was made for assessing the award. The Tribunal applied multiplier of 5 in reference to the age of the deceased whereas the appropriate multiplier to be applied would be 18 looking to the age of the deceased himself. 10. They thus prayed that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal be enhanced appropriately. 11. Per contra, Shri V.R. Mehta and Shri M.P. Goswami learned counsel for the respondent insurance company vehemently opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants. 10. They thus prayed that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal be enhanced appropriately. 11. Per contra, Shri V.R. Mehta and Shri M.P. Goswami learned counsel for the respondent insurance company vehemently opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants. He submitted that as the legal heirs of Bhagwati cannot be aid to be the dependents of late Shri Ram Singh and thus, they are not entitled to any compensation whatsoever and no enhancement is called for in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned judgment cum award. 13. The first issue, which calls for consideration of this Court is, as to whether the legal heirs of Smt. Bhagwati are entitled to pursue this appeal for enhancement after her death. The same issue arose before the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gangaram S/o Gelaji & Anr. vs. Mangilal S/o Gulabchand Sahu & two Ors. reported in MANU/MP/0160/2010 decided on 23.8.2010. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court held that once a right is crystallized and vests in the dependent, it becomes a civil right and the legal representatives are entitled to step into the shoes of the dependent for pursuing the claim. In view of the aforesaid legal proposition, the contention advanced by Shri V.R. Mehta and Shri M.P. Goswami learned counsels for the insurance company that the legal heirs of Smt. Bhagwati are not entitled to pursue the enhancement appeal after her death cannot be accepted. 14. Now coming to the question of enhancement. This Court is of the opinion that as Smt. Bhagwati ahs passed away and as all the claimants are themselves able bodied persons they definitely do not fall in the category of dependents. Thus, it would not be just and fair to grant any enhancement in the compensation by way of rise in income by future prospects. The only two considerations, which thus remain are regarding the multiplier applied by the Tribunal and the deduction towards personal needs and expenses. As original claimant was only the mother of the deceased and as the deceased was a bachelor, the deduction towards personal needs and expenses has to be done at 1/2 and not 1/3rd as done by the Tribunal. As original claimant was only the mother of the deceased and as the deceased was a bachelor, the deduction towards personal needs and expenses has to be done at 1/2 and not 1/3rd as done by the Tribunal. The question of multiplier to be applied in cases of death of a bachelor is no longer res-integra in view of the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Amrit Bhanu Shali and Ors. vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors. reported in (2012) 11 SCC 738 = 2012(3) RLW 2748 (SC) and Reshma Kumari & Ors. vs. Madan Mohan & Anr. reported in (2013) 9 SCC 65 = 2013(2) RLW 1589 (SC). As per the law propounded in both these cases, the multiplier has to be applied in reference to the age of the deceased and not in reference to the age of the claimant. As the deceased was 22 years of age at the time of the accident, the appropriate multiplier to be applied would be 18 and not 5 as done by the Tribunal. 15. The challenge made by the learned counsel for the appellants to the finding regarding income of the deceased is not prima facie acceptable. The Tribunal was justified in holding the income of the deceased to be Rs.1500/- per month. 16. Thus, the calculation for assessing just compensation on account of death of Ram Singh would be as follows: TOTAL Age of the deceased 22 years Annual income of the deceased Rs.1500x12= Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/- Deduction to the extent of 1/2 from the income towards personal expenditure and needs Rs.9000/- Rs.9,000/- Multiplier to be applied to net income @ 18 Rs.1,62,000/- Loss of love and affection as awarded by Tribunal Rs.25,000/- Rs.1,87,000/- Total compensation awardable Rs.1,87,000/- 17. The claimants shall be entitled to interest on the original amount at the rate decided by the learned Tribunal i.e. 12% per annum. On the enhanced amount, the interest applicable would be 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. 18. The learned Tribunal shall be at discretion to disburse the awarded amount in appropriate proportions of cash and fixed Deposits in its wisdom looking to the facts and circumstances of the case. 19. On the enhanced amount, the interest applicable would be 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. 18. The learned Tribunal shall be at discretion to disburse the awarded amount in appropriate proportions of cash and fixed Deposits in its wisdom looking to the facts and circumstances of the case. 19. Any amount already paid by the insurance company under Section 140 and/or proviso to Section 173 or any other amount, shall be adjusted towards the amount finally awarded by this Court. 20. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.