Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 250 (RAJ)

Noras Devi v. Sh. S. E. Mudhu

2021-02-01

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2021
JUDGMENT 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is being heard and disposed of finally. 2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-claimants against the judgment and award dated 19.03.2004 passed by M.A.C.T., Rajsamand in Claim Case No. 415/2002 whereby, an amount of Rs. 13,47,600/- was awarded to the appellants-claimants. Dissatisfied with the award, the present appeal has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submits that learned Tribunal committed an error while computing the compensation on account of the death of Ram Chandra in this case. He further submits that the deceased Ram chandra was working in the Hindustan Zinc Company Ltd. and an amount of Rs. 1,24,000/- per year was his salary, towards the services rendered by him. He submits that since, there are five dependents in the family of the deceased Ram Chandra , the learned Tribunal should have taken into consideration the deduction of 1/4 as an amount spent on the deceased. He submits that deduction at the rate of 1/3 is against the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) SC 5157 & The New India Insurance Company Ltd. And Ors. vs. Somwati and Ors. reported in (2020) 9 SCC 644 . He submits that no amount towards the future prospects has been taken into consideration while computing the award, therefore, the same is also required to be taken into account while recomputing the award in the present case. He also submits that the learned Tribunal has not taken into consideration the loss of consortium to the dependent family members in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi and Somwati and Ors. (supra). 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration all the relevant documents for arriving at a 'just compensation' in the present case. In the light of the factual matrix, the evidence produced before the trial court and the judgment passed by the Tribunal, no interference is warranted in this case. Counsel for the respondents, however, is not in a position to controvert the proposition argued by the learned counsel for the appellant for recomputation of the award in the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Pranay Sethi and Somwati & Ors. (supra). Counsel for the respondents, however, is not in a position to controvert the proposition argued by the learned counsel for the appellant for recomputation of the award in the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Pranay Sethi and Somwati & Ors. (supra). 5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar. It is an admitted position that on 02.09.2002, the deceased Ram Chandra, while travelling in a Jeep, met with an accident with the vehicle of the respondents. Due to the injuries sustained, Ram Chandra died and the dependents thereafter filed the claim petition. 6. A bare perusal of the award impugned and the documents show that deceased Ram Chandra was working in the Hindustan Zinc Ltd. and was earning an amount of Rs. 1,24,000/- (after deduction of the Income Tax). Admittedly, there are five dependent family members and no amount towards the future prospects has been taken into consideration while computing the award. Thus, the award is required to be recomputed in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi and Somwati (supra). For future prospects :- 50% of Rs. 1,24,000/- (Income of deceased) Rs. 62,000/- Rs. 1,24,000/- + Rs. 62,000/- Rs. 1,86,000/- Amount to be deducted as spent on himself. Rs. 1,86,000/- / 1/4 = Rs. 46,500/- Dependence Amount Rs. 1,86,000-Rs. 46,500 = Rs. 1,39,500/- The age of deceased was 33 years, therefore, a multiplier of 16 will be applied. (I) Compensation due to death 1,39,500 x 16 Rs. 22,32,000 (II) For the Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- (III) For the loss of consortium Rs. 47,000/- (IV) Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- (V) Loss of parental consortium to each of the three children Rs. 1,20,000/- (VI) Loss of consortium to father Rs. 40,000/- Total Rs. 24,69,000/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal vide award dated 29.05.2013 Rs. 13,47,600/- Enhanced amount Rs. 11,21,400/- 7. The appeal is, therefore, partly allowed. In view of the recomputation of the award done, the respondents are directed to pay an enhanced amount of Rs. 11,21,400/- (Rs. Eleven Lac Twenty One Thousand Four Hundred) to the appellant-claimant in addition to award already awarded by the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from today. The said amount shall carry an interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. 8. 11,21,400/- (Rs. Eleven Lac Twenty One Thousand Four Hundred) to the appellant-claimant in addition to award already awarded by the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from today. The said amount shall carry an interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. 8. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. Record of the learned Tribunal be sent back immediately.