Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 427 (RAJ)

Union Of India v. Madat Ali

2021-02-18

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2021
JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants/non-claimants against the Judgment and Award dated 02.11.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaisalmer in M.A.C. Case No. 04/2014 whereby an amount of Rs. 9,67,955/- was awarded as compensation in favour of the respondents-claimants on account of death of Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu in the accident which occurred on 20.08.2013. 2. Learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence on record and hearing the counsel for the parties partly allowed the claim petition filed by the respondents-claimants awarding a total sum of Rs. 9,67,955/- in their favour. 3. Mr. Indra Raj Choudhary, learned counsel for the Union of India has vehemently submitted that the findings recorded by the Tribunal on Issue No. 1 are incorrect. He further submits that in fact, no accident occurred with the vehicle of the appellants. In fact, the death of Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu was caused due to motor-cycle having been overrun on the divider and therefore, the truck of the appellants was falsely implicated in the present case just to claim the compensation. He further submits that even as per the site plan prepared by the police during the course of investigation conducted in the criminal case, it has come on record that there were no signs of the accident at the place of accident shown in the site plan. There were no bloodstains present on the place where the accident had taken place. Learned counsel emphatically submitted that even on the vehicle of the appellant there were no dent, no damage or scratch marks present. Therefore, it can safely be presumed that the army truck was not involved in the accident at all. He also submits that as per the memo of appearance of the death of Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu (Ex.P/5), no injury marks were present on the body of the deceased. The post-mortem of the body of the deceased Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu was not conducted just to avoid the true story of the accident. On the strength of the submissions made, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the findings recorded by the Tribunal on Issue No. 1 is incorrect. 4. The post-mortem of the body of the deceased Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu was not conducted just to avoid the true story of the accident. On the strength of the submissions made, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the findings recorded by the Tribunal on Issue No. 1 is incorrect. 4. He also submits that it has come on record that deceased Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu was a house-wife, whereas, the Tribunal has taken into consideration the monthly income of the deceased on the basis of the fact that she was working as a casual labour and thus, the computation of the award, while considering the deceased as casual labour is also incorrect. 5. Lastly, he submits that the rate of interest i.e. 9% awarded in the present case is also on the higher side and the same is also required to be reduced considerably. 6. Per contra, Mr. L.D. Khatri, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the Tribunal has correctly recorded the finding on Issue No. 1 in view of the evidence brought before it. The Tribunal correctly appreciated the testimony of Madat AN (A.W. 1) and Kasam Khan (A.W. 2) and other relevant documents produced before it. Learned counsel while supporting the finding on Issue No. 1 has submitted that while Madat AN and Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu were standing on the road waiting for taxi, the appellants' truck which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, dashed Bhanwari @ Madu due to which she sustained grievous injuries and ultimately died. As per the site plan and the investigation conducted, the police submitted the charge-sheet against the driver of the military truck and not only this, the army truck itself was also intercepted by the police authorities immediately after the accident. The FIR was also registered on the same day. Learned counsel further submits that there is no reason to disbelieve the findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal, therefore, the same require no interference in view of the appreciation of evidence made by the Tribunal on Issue No. 1. 7. Learned counsel submits that even if it is assumed that Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu was a house-wife she is entitled to 'just compensation' in the light of the Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Kirti and Another Etc. 7. Learned counsel submits that even if it is assumed that Smt. Bhanwari @ Madu was a house-wife she is entitled to 'just compensation' in the light of the Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Kirti and Another Etc. vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. reported in JT 2021 (1) SC 874. Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal rightly computed the award taking into consideration the income of the deceased as per the minimum wages prevailing at the time of accident. 8. He further submits that Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Erudhaya Priya vs. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd. reported in AIR 2020 SC 4284 has awarded interest @ 9% per annum and therefore, the same does not require any interference by this Court. 9. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the Judgment and Award dated 02.11.2015 and other relevant record of the case. 10. The Tribunal deliberated the Issue No. 1 in detail and noted that on 20.08.2013 while Madat AN and Bhanwari @ Madu were waiting for taxi on the road, the army truck dashed them from behind, due to which Bhanwari @ Madu sustained injuries resulting into her death. The factum of death of Bhanwari @ Madu was proved in light of the testimony of eye-witness AW-2 Kasam Khan. It is also noted that on the same day, the First Information Report was registered and the police after investigation found the truck and the driver of the subject truck involved in the accident. Even, as per the site plan prepared by the police, the place of accident is marked as "A" showing the truck coming from Jaisalmer side and hitting Bhanwari @ Madu who was standing on the side of road. The testimony of the independent witness Kasam Khan cannot be disbelieved only on the ground that no bloodstain marks were present at the place of accident or there were no external injuries seen on the body of Bhanwari @ Madu as per the Ex.P/5. The testimony of the independent witness Kasam Khan cannot be disbelieved only on the ground that no bloodstain marks were present at the place of accident or there were no external injuries seen on the body of Bhanwari @ Madu as per the Ex.P/5. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellants is also noted to be rejected that post-mortem of the body of Bhanwari @ Madu was not got conducted, to falsely implicate the appellants' truck and to cover up the death of Bhanwari @ Madu which was caused because of her falling from the motor-cycle on account of motor-cycle having collided or dashed to the divider on the road. 11. In view of the discussions made above and findings of the Tribunal recorded on Issue No. 1, this Court is convinced that the vehicle of the appellants caused the accident in the present case and the findings of the Tribunal to this effect are not required to be interfered with. 12. As far as the computation of the income is concerned, even if it is assumed that Bhanwari @ Madu was a house-wife then in the light of the Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Kirti and Another (supra), the claimants are entitled for computation of a reasonable income. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kirti and Another (supra) has held as under:- "32. Returning to the question of how such notional income of a homemaker is to be calculated, there can be no fixed approach. It is to be understood that in such cases the attempt by the Court is to fix an approximate economic value for all the work that a homemaker does, impossible though that task may be. Courts must keep in mind the idea of awarding just compensation in such cases, looking to the facts and circumstances [See R.K. Malik v. Kiran Pal, (2009) 8 SCC 461]. 33. One method of computing the notional income of a homemaker is by using the formula provided in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which has now been omitted by the Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Act, 2019. The Second Schedule provided that the income of a spouse could be calculated as one third of the income of the earning surviving spouse. This was the method ultimately adopted by the Court in the Arun Kumar Agrawal (supra) case. The Second Schedule provided that the income of a spouse could be calculated as one third of the income of the earning surviving spouse. This was the method ultimately adopted by the Court in the Arun Kumar Agrawal (supra) case. However, rationale behind fixing the ratio as one third is not very clear. [See Arun Kumar Agrawal (supra)] 34. Apart from the above, scholarship around this issue could provide some guidance as to other methods to determine the notional income for a homemaker.8 Some of these methods were highlighted by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in the case of Minor Deepika (supra) which held as follows: "10. The Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act gives a value to the compensation payable in respect of those who had no income prior to the accident and for a spouse, it says that one third of the income of the earning surviving spouse should be the value. Exploration on the internet shows that there have been efforts to understand the value of a homemaker's unpaid labour by different methods. One is, the opportunity cost which evaluates her wages by assessing what she would have earned had she not remained at home, viz., the opportunity lost. The second is, the partnership method which assumes that a marriage is an equal economic partnership and in this method, the homemaker's salary is valued at half her husband's salary. Yet another method is to evaluate homemaking by determining how 8 See Ann Chadeau, What is Households' Non Market Production Worth, OECD ECONOMIC STUDIES NO. 18 (1992); Also see United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, supra note 7.much it would cost to replace the homemaker with paid workers. This is called the Replacement Method." (emphasis supplied) 35. However, it must be remembered that all the above methods are merely suggestions. There can be no exact calculation or formula that can magically ascertain the true value provided by an individual gratuitously for those that they are near and dear to. The attempt of the Court in such matters should therefore be towards determining, in the best manner possible, the truest approximation of the value added by a homemaker for the purpose of granting monetary compensation. 36. Whichever method a Court ultimately chooses to value the activities of a homemaker, would ultimately depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. The attempt of the Court in such matters should therefore be towards determining, in the best manner possible, the truest approximation of the value added by a homemaker for the purpose of granting monetary compensation. 36. Whichever method a Court ultimately chooses to value the activities of a homemaker, would ultimately depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. The Court needs to keep in mind its duty to award just compensation, neither assessing the same conservatively, nor so liberally as to make it a bounty to claimants [National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 ; Kajal v. Jagdish Chand, (2020) 4 SCC 413 ]." 13. Since, the accident in the present case is of 2013, the wages for the unskilled labour were Rs. 4,316/- at the time of accident and the Tribunal has rightly taken into consideration the same. The amount of income of the deceased taken into consideration by the Tribunal in the present case is just and proper. Therefore, the finding on Issue No. 2 also does not suffer from any infirmity. 14. Lastly, the amount awarded has been saddled with the payment of 9% interest per annum the same is also not interfered with by this Court in the light of the Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Erudhaya Priya (supra). 15. In view of the discussions made above, the appeal of appellants is bereft of any force and the same is, therefore, dismissed.