Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1671 (RAJ)

Gopal Singh Solanki v. Salim Khan

2018-08-08

VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR

body2018
JUDGMENT Virendra Kumar Mathur, J. This miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is filed against the judgment and award dated 2.3.2001 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Jodhpur in Motor Accident Case No.227/1999, whereby the claim petition is partly allowed. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the claim petition was filed by the appellant-claimants before the tribunal claiming compensation under various heads for a sum of Rs. 26,62,000/- on account of death of Kumari Pinki @ Kamini in an accident which took place on 17.10.1998. It was averred that at the relevant time deceased was 17 years of age and was undertaking training of stenography in Industrial Training Institute and as such she was to get job of stenography and thereby she would have earned Rs. 4000/- per month. It was also averred that the deceased used to assist her parents in tailoring job and thereby she also used to earn Rs. 1000/- per month. It was also contended that future prospects of deceased was bright. It was further averred that had the deceased not died in the ill-fated accident, she would have earned handsome amount and she would have contributed her major earning to the claimants. There were every chances of advancement in life and career of the deceased and as such she had good future prospects. As such, compensation under various heads was claimed. 3. Ex-Parte orders was passed for the respondents No.1 and 2. Respondent No.3 filed its written statement. On the pleadings of the parties learned tribunal after framing all the issues received evidence of the parties and passed the impugned award. 4. It was contended that while deciding issue No.4, consolidated sum of Rs. 97,500/- was awarded as compensation. The amount of compensation assessed and awarded by the tribunal is too low, highly unreasonable and against the well settled law governing assessment of quantum of compensation. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the award, so far as it relates to assessment of quantum of compensation, this miscellaneous appeal is preferred for enhancement of award on the following grounds amongst others. 5. The appellants contended that at the relevant time the deceased was 17 years of age and she was undertaking training in stenography and after completion of training she would have earned Rs. 4000/- per month. 5. The appellants contended that at the relevant time the deceased was 17 years of age and she was undertaking training in stenography and after completion of training she would have earned Rs. 4000/- per month. She was also assisting her parents in tailoring job and used to earn Rs. 1000/- per month. She had very good future prospects. The tribunal has not considered future prospects while deciding the issue of compensation. 6. Learned tribunal has determined annual contribution to the extent of Rs. 6000/- on assumption of conjectures and surmises. The tribunal has applied lower multiplier and looking to the age of deceased higher multiplier should be applied. 7. Counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the contentions raised by the appellants and contended that deceased Kumari Pinki was a student and she had no independent income and her parents are not dependent on her. The tribunal has rightly decided the issue. 8. Heard counsel for the parties. 9. Admittedly Kumari Pinki aged 17 years as per the appellants is a student and pursuing her career and learning stenography. She had no independent income. Under these circumstances Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, at clause No.6 which refers to notional income for compensation to those persons who had no income prior to accident. The relevant portion of clause No.6 states as under :- "6. Notional income for compensation to those who has no income prior to accident: (a) Non-earning persons Rs. 15,000/- p.a." 10. The aforesaid clause of Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is considered in the case of Lata Wadhwa & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors, (2001) 8 SCC 197 , while examining the tortuous liability of the tort-feasor has examined the criteria for awarding compensation for death of children in accident between age group of 10 to 15 years and held in the above case that the compensation shall be awarded taking the contribution of the children to the family at Rs. 12,000/- p.a. and multiplier 11 has been applied taking the age of the father and then under the conventional heads the compensation of Rs. 25,000/- was awarded. Thus, a total sum of Rs. 1,57,000/- was awarded in that case. In my considered opinion the notional income of a non-earning member prior to the date of accident was fixed at Rs. 12,000/- p.a. and multiplier 11 has been applied taking the age of the father and then under the conventional heads the compensation of Rs. 25,000/- was awarded. Thus, a total sum of Rs. 1,57,000/- was awarded in that case. In my considered opinion the notional income of a non-earning member prior to the date of accident was fixed at Rs. 15,000/- per annum and Kumari Pinki by working hard is certainly contributing substantial money. 11. In view of the aforesaid, it would be just and reasonable to take the notional income at Rs. 30,000/- and looking to the age of father as 40 years and mother as 36 years at the time of accident, by applying the legal principles laid down in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 , the multiplier of 15 can be applied to the multiplicand. Thus, 30,000 x 15 = 4,50,000 and 50,000/- under conventional heads towards loss of love and affection, funeral expenses, last rites as held in Kerala SRTC v. Susamma Thomas, (1994) 2 SCC 176 , which is referred to in Lata Wadhwa's case and the said amount under the conventional heads is awarded even in relation to the death of children between 10 to 15 years old. 12. In this case also Rs. 50,000/- is awarded under conventional heads. For the aforesaid reasons the said amount would be fair, just and reasonable compensation to be awarded in favour of the appellants. The said amount will carry interest @ 7% per annum. 13. Accordingly, this miscellaneous appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and award dated 2.3.2001 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Jodhpur in Motor Accident Case No.227/1999 is set aside. The awarded amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest @ 7% per annum should be paid to the appellants from the date of filing of the appeal till the date of payment.