Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 304 (RAJ)

Nenu Devi v. Surta Ram

2021-02-08

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2021
JUDGMENT 1. The matter comes upon an application (Inward No. 01/2021) filed by the appellant seeking early hearing of the matter. 2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. 3. With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing today itself. 4. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-claimant against the judgment and award dated 13.03.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Barmer in ClaimCase No. 23/2013 whereby an amount of Rs. 1,11/000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum was awarded to the appellant-claimant on account of death of Chena Ram in the accident, which occurred on 11.10.2012. 5. A claim petition was filed by the appellant-claimant before the Tribunal stating that on 11.10.2012, while Chena Ram was coming from school to their house in the bus bearing Registration No. RJ-19-PA-1622, the non-claimant No. 1 plied the bus rashly and negligently, due to which Chena Ram was ran over by the bus and sustained grievous injuries. He was taken to Mathura Das Mathur Hospital, where he succumbed to the injuries. In these circumstances, the appellant-claimant claimed the compensation under various heads on account of death of Chena Ram. 6. The Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence and hearing the arguments of the parties, passed the judgment and award dated 13.03.2015 vide which an amount of Rs. 1,11,000/- was awarded as compensation under various heads in favour of the appellant-claimant. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant submits that the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,11,000/- as compensation on account of death of Chena Ram, which is far too less in view of the various pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He further submits that the deceased Chena Ram was although, a student but he was helping in the agricultural work to the family and thus, was contributing a lot for earning income from the agricultural work. Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal was absolutely wrong in calculating the amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards annual income of the deceased. He further submits that while deciding the claim in the present case, income of the deceased should have been taken into consideration as per the minimum wages prevailing at the time of death of the deceased. Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal was absolutely wrong in calculating the amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards annual income of the deceased. He further submits that while deciding the claim in the present case, income of the deceased should have been taken into consideration as per the minimum wages prevailing at the time of death of the deceased. He further submits that no amount towards future prospects of the deceased Chena Ram has been awarded by the Tribunal in the present case in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited V/s Pranay Sethi & ors. reported in 2017/ ACJ/2700, therefore, the award in the present case is required to be calculated in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). He, therefore, prays that the present appeal may be allowed and the amount of compensation in favour of the appellant-claimant may be enhanced suitably. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance Company while supporting the judgment and award dated 13.03.2015 passed by the Tribunal has submitted that the Tribunal has correctly taken into consideration the monthly income of the deceased Chena Ram and has rightly computed the award in the present case. The amount awarded by the Tribunal is 'just compensation' and does not require any interference by this Court. However, he fairly submits that the calculation of amount in the present case is required to be made in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). 10. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the judgment and award dated 13.03.2015 as well as other relevant documents. 11. It is an admitted fact that the deceased Chena Ram was a student of 18 years old. As per the evidence available on record, he was helping the family in the agricultural work and thereby, enhancing the income derived from the agricultural work by working hard in the agricultural field. The income of the deceased Chena Ram assessed by the Tribunal to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-is, therefore, not proper. In the opinion of this Court, at least, the income of unskilled labour prevailing at the time of death of the deceased Chena Ram should have been taken into consideration while computing the award. The income of the deceased Chena Ram assessed by the Tribunal to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-is, therefore, not proper. In the opinion of this Court, at least, the income of unskilled labour prevailing at the time of death of the deceased Chena Ram should have been taken into consideration while computing the award. Thus, the judgment dated 13.03.2015 passed by the Tribunal in the present case is modified to that extent and the award is required to be made taking into consideration the income of the deceased Chena Ram as Rs. 3,822/- per month as unskilled labour as per the minimum wages prevailing at the time of death of the deceased Chena Ram. The other factors which have been taken into consideration by the Tribunal will remain unchanged. Thus, the award is recomputed in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) as under :- For future prospects: 50% of Rs.4760/- (Income of deceased) Rs. 2380/- Rs. 4760/- + Rs. 2380/ Rs. 7140/- Amount to be deducted as spent on himself. Rs. 7140/- / 1/4 = Rs. 1785/- Dependence Amount Rs.7140 Rs. 1785 = Rs. 5355/- The age of deceased was 18 years, therefore, a multiplier of 18 will be applied. (I) Compensation due to death 5355x 12 x 17 Rs. 10,92,420/- (Round off Figure) (II) Loss of Consortium Rs. 70,000/- Total Rs. 11,62,420/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal vide award dated 16/06/2006 Rs. 7,15,000/- Enhanced amount Rs. 4,47,420/- 12. Thus, in view of the discussion made above, the present appeal is partly allowed and the Judgment dated 13.03.2015 passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that in view of the recomputation of the award done, the respondent - Insurance Company is directed to pay enhanced amount of Rs. 5,36,800/-(Rs. Five Lacs Thirty Six Thousand Eight Hundred only) to the appellant-claimant in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal towards full and final settlement of the claim, within a period of eight weeks from today. The said amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.