Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2389 (RAJ)

Tola Ram v. Pyara Singh

2019-09-06

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2019
ORDER : SANDEEP MEHTA, J. 1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants, being aggrieved by the judgment-cum-award dated 26.05.2003 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ratangarh (hereinafter referred to as 'The Tribunal') in Civil Misc. Case No. 43/2000 whereby, the claim petition filed by the appellants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation on the ground of death of Om Prakash, the sole bread earner of their family in a road accident was partly allowed. 2. The claimants filed the claim application claiming damages to the tune of Rs. 16,41,000/-. The Tribunal partly accepted the claim application and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,60,000/- to the claimants by the impugned award. Being dissatisfied by the quantum of the amount awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have approached this Court through this Misc. Appeal seeking enhancement. 3. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at Bar and have gone through the material available on record. 4. The formal facts regarding the manner, in which, the accident took place, the entitlement of the claimants to receive compensation, the income of the deceased at the time of the incident are not in dispute. 5. The deceased Om Prakash was working as a driver on the Canter Vehicle RJ-10/G-0236. He loaded the truck with wheat bags and started from Village Kechiya towards Sadubadi. When the vehicle had reached just ahead of 'Kasba Mahajan'; the offending Truck No. PB31/2157 being driven by Rajbinder Singh came from the opposite direction and was being driven in rash and negligent manner. The driver of the offending truck drove the truck to the wrong lane and collided the same with the Canter being driven by Om Prakash, who expired at the spot. Rajbinder Singh, driver of the offending truck also died in the accident. The truck driven by the deceased Om Prakash was insured with the respondent United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 6. The age of Shri Om Prakash at the time of accident was 30 years. There is no significant dispute in these parties regarding income of the deceased. Though the claimants alleged that Om Prakash was drawing a sum of Rs. The truck driven by the deceased Om Prakash was insured with the respondent United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 6. The age of Shri Om Prakash at the time of accident was 30 years. There is no significant dispute in these parties regarding income of the deceased. Though the claimants alleged that Om Prakash was drawing a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month by working as a truck driver, but since, the owner of the truck was not produced in evidence and as no salary certificate was produced and proved by the claimants, the Tribunal considered the monthly income of Om Prakash to be Rs. 1800 per month, applying the principles of Minimum Wages Act. The issues which have been advanced by the appellants' counsel seeking enhancement are that:- 1. The Tribunal did not award any suitable amount to the appellants' towards loss of consortium, loss of love and affection and towards funeral expenses. 2. The second limb of argument was that as the deceased was aged 30 years at the time of accident, so the multiplier of 18 should have been applied while calculating the loss of income and the multiplier 16 was wrongly applied. 7. Both these contentions of the appellants' counsel are not disputed by the counsel representing the respondents. Thus, the revised/enhanced compensation to which the appellants are entitled is calculated in the manner indicated below:- 8. The compensation towards funeral expenses, loss of love and affection and loss of consortium shall stand enhanced from a sum of Rs. 24,000/- to Rs. 70,000/-. 9. As the claimants were six in number, the deduction towards personal needs and expenses of the deceased has to be kept restricted to 1/4th. The Tribunal after making addition of future prospects to the income of the deceased, held his monthly income to be Rs. 2,700/- per month. After deducting 1/4th from the said amount, the monthly income comes to Rs. 2,025/-. Thus, the calculation of loss of income would be as follows:- Rs. 2,025 X 12 X 18 = Rs. 4,37,400/-. 10. The Tribunal awarded only a sum of Rs. 3,36,000/- to the claimants under this head. Thus the claimants are entitled to enhancement of Rs. 1,01,400/- on this count. 11. Thus the claimants would be entitled to enhancement of Rs. 46,000/- under the head of loss of consortium; loss of estate and funeral expenses and Rs. 1,01,400/- towards loss of income. The Tribunal awarded only a sum of Rs. 3,36,000/- to the claimants under this head. Thus the claimants are entitled to enhancement of Rs. 1,01,400/- on this count. 11. Thus the claimants would be entitled to enhancement of Rs. 46,000/- under the head of loss of consortium; loss of estate and funeral expenses and Rs. 1,01,400/- towards loss of income. The enhanced amount shall carry interest to the tune of 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim application till the date of disbursement. The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced amount with the Tribunal within three months. The enhanced amount of damages shall be disbursed to the claimants as per law. 12. With these directions and observations, the Misc. Appeal is allowed.