Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 2516 (RAJ)

Sita v. Mohaseen

2022-09-23

MADAN GOPAL VYAS

body2022
ORDER 1. The instant Civil Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the claimants-appellants against the judgment and award dated 27.07.2015 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Dungarpur (hereinafter referred to as ’the Learned Tribunal’ for short) in MAC Case No. 515/2014, whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compenstion to the tune of Rs.2,63,000/- to the claimants-appellants. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on account of death of one-Naresh Banjara, in a motor vehicular accident, which was occurred on 14.08.2014, due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No. RJ 27 TA 1429, the claimants-appellants preferred the claim petition before the learned Tribunal alleging therein that the deceased-Naresh Banjara was about 12 years’ old and was studying at the time of accident and, therefore, seeking total compensation to the tune of Rs. 28,15,000/-, the claim petition was preferred. 3. The respondent Nos.1 to 3 submitted their reply to the claim petition and denied the averments mentioned in the claim petition. Similarly, the respondent No.4-Insurance Company also submitted its reply and submitted that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having effective and valid driving licence at the time of accident and the owner of the offending vehicle also was not having effective permit. Thus, it was submitted that respondent No.4-Insurance company was not liable to satisfy the claim amount. 4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed as many as four issues and after conclusion of the trial, the learned Tribunal vide impugned judgment & award dated 27.07.2015 awarded the total compensation to the tune of Rs.2,63,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e 29.09.2014. 5. Challenging the aforesaid judgment and award dated 27.07.2015, learned counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants vehemently submitted that, at the time of accident, the deceased was 12 years old and was studying. The learned tribunal has wrongly considered his income to be Rs.15,000/- on notional basis. Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants further submitted that the learned Tribunal has also committed illegality while not awarding a single penny towards the future prospects. The learned tribunal has wrongly considered his income to be Rs.15,000/- on notional basis. Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants further submitted that the learned Tribunal has also committed illegality while not awarding a single penny towards the future prospects. It is also submitted that as per the guidelines of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, in case of a death of a child between 10 to 15 years, the compensation ought to have been at least Rs. 5 lacs. It is also submitted that the said guidelines have been carved out by the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority on the basis of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors. Reported in 2014(1) SCC 244 . 6. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants also vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal has also not awarded amount towards the medical expenses submitted on behalf of the claimant-appellants to the tune of Rs.38,000/-. Thus, it is prayed that the claimants-appellants are entitled a sum of Rs.5,38,000/- as compensation. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant placed before this Court a copy of guidelines dated 15.04.2021 issued by RALSA and a copy of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. vs. Lala & Ors. Reported in 2014 (1) SCC 244 . 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company vehemently opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the claimants-appellants and submitted that the learned Tribunal after considering of the facts and circumstances of the case has rightly passed the impugned judgment and award and no interference in the same is called for. 9. After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the rival parties and after perusing the record, it is clear that at the time of accident the deceased was of the age of 12 years. The learned Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- p.a. on notional basis, which is lower side and contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. The learned Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- p.a. on notional basis, which is lower side and contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors.(supra), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under:- "We have also considered the fact that the rupee value has come down drastically from the year 1994, when the notional income of the non-earning member prior to the date of accidnet was fixed at Rs. 15,000/-. Further, the deceased boy, had he been alive would have certainly contributed substantially to the family of the appellants by working hard. In view of the aforesaid reasons, it would be just and reasonable for us to take his notional income at Rs.30,000/- and further taking the young age of the parents, namely the mother who was about 36 years old, at the time of accident, by applying the legal principles laid down in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 , the multiplier of 15 can be applied to the multiplicand. Thus, 30,000 x 15=4,50,000 and 50,000/- under conventional heads towards loss of love and affection, funeral expenses, last rites as held in Kerala SRTC vs. Susamma Thomas, (1994) 2 SCC 176 , which is referred to in Lata Wadhwa’s case and the said amount under the conventional heads is awarded even in relation to the death of children between 10 to 15 years old. In this case also we award Rs. 50,000/- under conventional heads. In our view, for the aforesaid reasons the said amount would be fair, just and reasonable compensation to be awarded in favour of the appellants. The said amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. by applying the law laid down in the case of Municpal Council of Delhi vs. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy, (2011) 14 SCC 481 , for the reason that the Insurance company has been contesting the claim of the appellants from 1992-2013 without settling their legitimate claim for nearly about 21 years, if the Insurance company had awarded and paid just and reasonable compensation to the appellants the same could have been either invested or kept in the fixed deposit, then the amount could have earned five times more than what is awarded today in this appeal. Therefore, awarding 9% interest on the compensation awarded in favour of the appellants is legally justified." 10. I have also perused the guidelines issues by the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority wherein as well, it is clarified that a sum of Rs. 5 lacs is to be awarded in case of death of a child between the age of 10 years to 15 years. A perusal of the impugned judgment and award, it is also clear that the learned Tribunal has not awarded amount towards the medical bills submitted by the claimants-appellants to the tune of Rs.38,000/-. 11. In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of and it is held that the claimant-appellants are entitled for total compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 lacs alongwith Rs.38,000/-towards medical bills that comes to Rs.5,38,000/-. The learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,63,000/-. 12. Therefore, the total enhanced amount comes to Rs.2,75,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 29.09.2014. 13. The enhanced amount shall be distributed to the claimants as per the terms & conditions enumerated by the learned Tribunal. 14. Record be sent back forthwith. 15. No costs.