Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 152 (MP)

Rajudibai v. Ganesh

2025-02-28

PREM NARAYAN SINGH

body2025
ORDER : 1. With consent of the parties, heard the matter finally. 2. This appeal by the insurance company under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is arising out of the award dated 05.12.2023 passed by Additional Member to the Court of 1st Additional Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Sardarpur, District Dhar in MACC No.19/2023 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 04.12.2022, the deceased/Raju was going Barmandal to Barkheda on his motorcycle. At the same time, on opposite side, a motorcycle bearing registration No. MP11-NE-6530 driven by Ganesh hit the deceased's motorcycle, because of which Raju/deceased sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, he was sent for treatment to Mittal Hospital where he was died during treatment. Post-mortem of the deceased was done in P.M. Dhar Bhoj Hospital. Merg No. 42/2022 was registered and after investigation Crime No. 469/2022 was registered. In this sequence, charges were framed and challan was filed before the Court. 4. The tribunal framed issues and after taking evidence and hearing counsel for both parties, allowed the claim petition filed by appellants No.1 to 4 and awarded a compensation of Rs.13,97,000/- along with interest as follows:- 5. Being aggrieved by the said award, the appellants have filed this appeal stating that the tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased on the lower side and committed error of law by completely overlooking the facts. Therefore, it is prayed for setting aside the impugned award and alternatively prayed for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the tribunal by assessing the income of the deceased on the basis of minimum wages applicable to an unskilled labour at the relevant period. During the course of argument, counsel for appellants has submitted a copy of revised guidelines/instructions by MP State Legal Services Authority mentioning the mentioning the daily wages rates of labours from the year 2010-2011 to 2023-2024. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents have supported the impugned award with regard to the findings of the accident and death of the deceased in the motor accident. It is submitted that the tribunal has not committed any error in assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.7,775/- per month, hence prayed for reduction of compensation. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is submitted that the tribunal has not committed any error in assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.7,775/- per month, hence prayed for reduction of compensation. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is found that the accident was occurred on 04.12.2022 and FIR (Ex.P/2) was lodged on the same day i.e. 04.12.2022. According to the MLC report Ex-P/9 same was done on the same date and during the treatment, he was died. So considering all the documents, it is clearly established that deceased died due to the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident which was occurred on 04.12.2022. 8. So far as income of the deceased is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed it as Rs.7,775/- per month only for the reason that no document has been produced by the claimants as regards his income. As the deceased was working as a labourer, the tribunal could not have expected the appellants to produce any document regarding his income because such type of work is not done under any documents. 9. On this aspect, the law laid down in the case of Sapna and Others vs. Mangilal and Another, 2021 ACJ 957 by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, relevant portion is mentioned below :- “Having heard the learned counsel for parties and on perusal of the record, it is noticed that the appellant had deposed before the tribunal that the deceased was earning Rs.8,000/- per month, but no document in support of which was produced. The tribunal had noted that the deceased was about 20 years of age and was a labourer, therefore, considering the minimum wages and dearness allowance for the relevant period, the tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.6000/-. No notification/circular of the concerned Labour Officer was taken note of by the tribunal while mentioning the daily wages of Rs.6000/-. The circular dated 7/4/2018 issued by the Labour Officer, Barwani applicable to the period from 01/4/2018 to 30/9/2018 produced by the appellants reveals that the monthly wages on the basis of daily wages along with dearness allowance fixed by the concerned Labour Officer was Rs.7325/-. Hence, the tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income on the basis of the said circular.” 10. Hence, the tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income on the basis of the said circular.” 10. In this case, it has been mentioned that the income can be determined on the basis of minimum wages notified under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. 11. In view of the law laid down in Sapna (supra) and in view of Workman Compensation Act, 1923 and also as per the guidelines of the govt. fixed for the labours (unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled) for the period of 01.10.2022 to 31.03.2023, was of Rs.9,325/- per month (310.83 per day). As such, in the considered opinion of this Court, the tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.7,775/- per month in the present case, which is liable to be enhanced to Rs.9,325/- per month. Thus, the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal is on lower side which deserves to be enhanced as under: 12. Thus, the just and proper amount of compensation in the instant case is Rs.16,84,887/- as against the award of the Tribunal of Rs.13,97,000/-. Accordingly, the appellants No. 1 to 4/claimants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.2,87,887/- over and above the amount which has been awarded by the Tribunal. 13. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellants No. 1 to4/claimants is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount by a sum of Rs.2,87,887. The enhanced amount shall bear interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal. The other findings recorded by the Tribunal shall remain intact. 14. If the enhanced amount of compensation is in excess to the valuation of appeal, the difference of the Court fee (if not already paid), shall be deposited by the appellants/claimants within a period of one month and proof thereof, shall be submitted before the Registry. Further, the Registry shall issue certified copy of the order passed today. 15. In view of above, miscellaneous appeal filed by the appellants-claimants stands disposed of.