Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 51 (RAJ)

Geeta Devi v. Devi Lal

2025-01-08

REKHA BORANA

body2025
ORDER : 1. The appeal is reported to barred by 242 days. 2. An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed for condonation of the said delay. 3. The service on application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is complete. 4. For the reasons stated in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the same is allowed . The delay caused in filing the present appeal is condoned. 5. Admit. Issue notice. Service on respondent Nos.1, 2 & 4 is dispensed with at the request of learned counsel for the appellants-claimants and at the risk of the appellants-claimants. Learned counsel Mr. Vishal Singhal has put in appearance for respondent No.3-Insurance Company. Hence, service is complete. 6. At the request of learned counsels for the appellants- claimants and the Insurance Company, the matter has been heard finally. 7. The present misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants-claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation amount awarded vide judgment/award dated 20.11.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat, District Pali in MAC Case No. 73/2011. The learned Tribunal, vide impugned judgment/award dated 20.11.2013 awarded a sum of Rs.7,01,960/- in favour of the claimants alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. 8. Brief facts as pleaded in the claim petition are that on 13.08.2011, Tikamchand was en route from Devgarh to Sojat, carrying vegetables in his pickup bearing registration no. RJ 27/GA/7416. The pickup was being driven by Raju. The pickup being driven rashly and negligently by the driver upended and met with an accident. Unfortunately, due to the accident, Raju succumbed to his injuries, and Tikamchand sustained grievous injuries. However, during the course of treatment, Tikamchand also died. The offending vehicle, on the date of accident, was insured with respondent No.3 – Insurance Company. 9. The appellants-claimants are the dependants of deceased Tikamchand. The learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence available on record and after hearing the counsel for the parties, while assessing the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.4,836/-, awarded total compensation of Rs.7,01,960/- in favour of the appellants-claimants, the breakup of which is as under: 1. Income per month (after deduction towards personal expenses (1/4) in the monthly income of Rs.4,836/-) Rs.3,627/- 2. Loss of Income (as per the age of 35 years of the deceased, multiplier of 15). Income per month (after deduction towards personal expenses (1/4) in the monthly income of Rs.4,836/-) Rs.3,627/- 2. Loss of Income (as per the age of 35 years of the deceased, multiplier of 15). Rs.3,627x12x15 = Rs.6,52,860/- 3. Under the head of ‘consortium’ and ‘Funeral expenses’ Rs.35,000/- 4. Under the head of ‘medical expenses’ Rs.14,100/- 7. Amount awarded by the Tribunal Rs.7,01,960/- Learned Tribunal also awarded interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 12.10.2011. 10. Learned counsel for the appellants raised only three grounds: (i) Firstly , the learned Tribunal committed a significant error in its adjudication by providing insufficient compensation qua the conventional heads. (ii) Secondly , the learned Tribunal erred in omitting to take into consideration the future prospects of the deceased while computing the loss of income, which is in total contravention to principles/guidelines as laid down in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors.; (2017) 16 SCC 680 . (iii) Thirdly , learned Tribunal erred in applying multiplier of 15 whereas, keeping into consideration the age of the deceased, i.e., 35 years, a multiplier of 16 ought to have been applied in terms of the guidelines as set out in the case of Sarla Verma and Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Ors.; (2009) 6 SCC 121 11. Learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company is not in a position to refute the legal position regarding the above submissions. He however submits that if the Court is inclined to enhance the compensation amount, the interest for the period of delay in filing the present appeal i.e. 242 days, be not awarded to the appellants-claimants. 12. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants does not object to the said proposition. 13. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 14. So far as the amount to be awarded under the conventional heads is concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), has fixed the amount payable under the conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses to be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the said amount under conventional heads shall be payable to the appellants-claimants. 15. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the said amount under conventional heads shall be payable to the appellants-claimants. 15. A bare perusal of the award passed by the learned Tribunal shows that the age of the deceased was 35 years as per the injury report (Exhibit 10) and the postmortem report (Exhibit 11). Hence, with regard to the deceased's future prospects and the multiplier linked to the deceased's age, this Court draws upon the precedent set in the case of Sarla Verma (supra) and decides that addition for the deceased's future prospects will be at the rate of 40% and the multiplier corresponding to the deceased's age will be 16. 16. Consequently, the present appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment/award dated 20.11.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat, District Pali in MAC Case No. 73/2011 is modified to the extent that the appellants-claimants shall be entitled to the following compensation: 1. Income per month (after addition of future prospects (40%) and deductions for personal expenses (1/4) in the monthly income of Rs.4,836/-) Rs.5,077.8/- 2. Loss of Annual Income (as per the age of 35 years of the deceased, multiplier of 16). Rs.5,077.8x12x16 = Rs.9,74,937/- 3. Under the head of ‘consortium’ Rs.40,000x6 = Rs.2,40,000/- 4. Under the head of ‘loss of estate’ Rs.15,000/- 5. Under the head of ‘Funeral expenses’ Rs.15,000/- 6. Under the head of ‘Medical expenses’ Rs.14,100/- 7. Total amount of compensation Rs.12,59,037/- 8. Amount awarded by Tribunal Rs.7,01,960/- 9. Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.12,59,037/- - Rs.7,01,960/- -------------------- Rs. 5,57,077/- 17. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the actual payment is made. However, no interest shall be paid for the period of 242 days of delay in filing the present appeal. The respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the award amount (if not deposited yet) and the enhanced amount of compensation with the Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the same shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of this order till actual realization. Upon deposition, the learned Tribunal is directed to disburse the same to the claimants in terms of the award. 18. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.