Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 327 (RAJ)

Patasi Devi v. Rameshwar Lal

2021-02-10

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2021
JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal for enhancement of compensation has been preferred by the appellants-claimants against the judgment and award dated 25.11.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Deedwana, District Nagour in Claim Case No. 06/2010 whereby an amount of Rs. 5,54,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum was awarded to the appellants-claimants on account of death of Sukha Ram in the accident, which occurred on 27.11.2009. 2. A claim petition was filed by the appellants-claimants before the Tribunal stating that on 27.11.2009, when Sukha Ram was coming from Kuchaman to Ladaria in his tractor bearing Registration No. RJ-21-2R-4595, driver of jeep bearing Registration No. RJ-14-1C-0131 driving it rashly and negligently hit the trolley of the tractor from behind, due to which, the tractor turned down and Sukharam sustained grievous injuries. He was taken to the Government Hospital at Molasar from where he was referred to Kuchaman and then, further referred from Kuchaman to Ajmer, where he died while undergoing treatment. In these circumstances, the appellants-claimants claimed the compensation under various heads on account of death of Sukha Ram. 3. The Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence and hearing the arguments of the parties, passed the judgment and award dated 25.11.2011 vide which an amount of Rs. 5,54,000/- was awarded as compensation under various heads in favour of the appellants-claimants. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding the compensation in the head of future prospects of the deceased in light 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. He further submits that since the deceased Sukha Ram was 44 years old and was self-employed, therefore, amount towards future prospects to the tune of 25% is required to be awarded in the present case. He further submits that the Tribunal has erred in not taking into consideration this aspect. Learned counsel further submits that since no amount has been awarded towards loss of consortium to the minor son and the wife of the deceased Sukha Ram in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New India Insurance Company Ltd. V/s Somwati and Ors. reported in (2020) 9 SCC 644 , therefore, an amount of Rs. reported in (2020) 9 SCC 644 , therefore, an amount of Rs. 80,000/- is required to be awarded in the present case. 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. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has taken into consideration the entire evidence brought before it and the law prevailing at the time of passing of the award and thus, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is 'just compensation' in the present case. He further submits that looking to the age group of the deceased, the multiplier applied by the Tribunal in the present case is on the higher side. Learned counsel, however, is not in a position to dispute the fact of not awarding any amount towards the future prospects of the deceased as well as loss of consortium in light of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra) and Somwati (supra). However, he fairly submits that the calculation of amount in the present case is required to be made in light of the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra) and Somwati (supra). 7. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the judgment and award dated 25.11.2011 as well as other relevant documents. 8. In the present case, admittedly, the deceased Sukha Ram was 44 years of age at the time of accident. He was self-employed and therefore, the amount towards the future prospects is required to be computed in the present case in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). Since the multiplier applied in the present case is of 15, therefore, taking into consideration the age group of the deceased, the same is required to be taken as 14 as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). Further, the amount of Rs. 80,000/- towards loss of consortium is also required to be awarded in favour of the appellants-claimants in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Somwati (supra). The other factors which have been taken into consideration by the Tribunal will remain unchanged. Further, the amount of Rs. 80,000/- towards loss of consortium is also required to be awarded in favour of the appellants-claimants in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Somwati (supra). 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) and Somwati (supra) as under :- Monthly Income :- Rs. 4,200/- p.m. Deduction towards :- Rs. 4,200/- - 1/3 = Rs. 1,400/- p.m. amount spent on himself For future prospects :- 25% of Rs. 2,800/-(Income of deceased) Rs. 700/- Rs. 2,800/- + Rs. 700/- Rs. 3,500/- Dependence Amount (Rs. 3,500 x 12) Rs. 42,000/- The age of deceased was 44 years, therefore, a multiplier of 14 will be applied. (I) Compensation due to death Rs. 42,000 x 14 Rs. 5,88,000/- (II) (III) For the Loss of Estate For Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- (III) (IV) For the loss of consortium Medical Expenditures Rs. 80,000/- Rs. 33,000/- Total Rs. 7,31,000/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal vide award dated 25.11.2011 Rs. 5,54,000/- Enhanced amount Rs. 1,77,000/- 9. Thus, in view of the discussion made above, the present appeal is partly allowed and the Judgment dated 25.11.2011 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. 1,77,000/-(Rs. One Lac Seventy Seven Thousand only) to the appellants-claimants 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.