Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 2634 (RAJ)

Suman Devi Sharma v. Sh. Hukmaram

2022-10-18

ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Matter comes up on an interim application No.29782/2009 filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. Application stands allowed for the reasons stated therein. 3. Delay of 24 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 4. With the consent of the parties, arguments have been heard, at this stage. 5. Instant appeal has been preferred by the claimants-appellants assailing the impugned judgment and award dated 10.07.2009 passed by the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1-cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar (hereinafter referred to as ’the Tribunal’) in MAC Case No.348/2008 whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants-appellants has been allowed and respondent-Insurance Company has been directed to pay compensation of Rs.4,85,000/-with interest at the rate of 6.25 per cent per annum in favour of appellants-claimants. 6. Learned Tribunal after framing the issues and evaluating the evidence on record and after hearing counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition of the claimants-appellants and awarded compensation in favour of the claimants-appellants as indicated above. 7. Counsel for the appellant submits that the dependents were six in number and as per the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors: (2017) 16 SCC 680 , the personal expenses of the deceased should have been deducted as 1/4th, but without any basis, the Tribunal deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants further submits that no amount towards future prospects has been awarded. He further submits that under the conventional head, a very petty amount of Rs.53,000/- has been awarded while as per the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) appellants-claimants are entitled to get Rs.70,000/- under conventional head. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal while deciding the claim petition has correctly taken into consideration all the factors while calculating the award in the present case on the anvil of evidence produced before it. Thus, the judgment passed by the Tribunal does not call for any interference by this Court. He further submits that looking to the age of deceased, multiplier of 17 should have been applied but the Tribunal, without any basis, has applied the multiplier of 18. Thus, the judgment passed by the Tribunal does not call for any interference by this Court. He further submits that looking to the age of deceased, multiplier of 17 should have been applied but the Tribunal, without any basis, has applied the multiplier of 18. However, learned counsel is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by counsel for the appellants-claimants with respect to recomputation of award in the present case in the light of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). 9. Heard. 10. Considered the arguments of counsel for the parties. 11. Admittedly, the deceased was 29 years of age at the time of accident and the Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 18 instead of 17 in the present case. Further, the Tribunal has erroneously deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses of the deceased, while the amount under the head of personal expenses should have been deducted as 1/4th as the appellants-claimants are six in number, who are dependents of the deceased. 12. Further, the amount to the extent of 40% is required to be added towards future prospects and Rs.70,000/- is required to be added towards conventional head in the light of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). 13. Thus, the award is recomputed as under:- Annual income (as assessed by the Tribunal Rs. 3000 x 12 = 36000/- Add 40 % towards future prospects Rs. 36,000/- + 14,400/- = 50,400/- Multiplier to be applied 17 Rs. 8,56,800/- Less 1/4th amount towards personal expenses Rs.8,56,800/- - Rs. 2,14,200/-= Rs. 6,42,600/- Conventional heads (Rs.53,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal) Rs. 70,000/- Total compensation awardable Rs.7,12,600/- Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.4,85,000/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs. 2,27,600/- 14. In view of the above, the appellants-claimants would be entitled to get a further sum of Rs. 2,27,600/- from the Insurance Company. Insurance company is directed to pay additional amount of Rs. 2,27,600/- in addition to the amount already awarded within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the actual payment is made. 15. Insurance company is directed to pay additional amount of Rs. 2,27,600/- in addition to the amount already awarded within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the actual payment is made. 15. The learned Tribunal shall disburse Rs.50,000/- in the Saving Bank Account of the claimants-appellants and the balance amount of the enhanced compensation be invested in FDRs in any Nationalised Bank for a period of three years, to be renewed every year and interest accrued on the deposit shall be paid to the appellants-claimants on monthly basis. 16. Consequently, the appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 17. All pending applications, if any stand disposed of.