Allowed

Bhagwati Devi v. Ramlal and Ors.

Rajasthan HC2 Jul 2018CMA/123/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MVA appeal challenging award for enhancement of compensation. Court found Tribunal erred in using outdated income figure. Enhanced disability compensation from Rs.58,320 to Rs.96,805 considering correct minimum wages and disability percentage. Appeal allowed; award modified.

What did the court decide?

Impugned award modified to enhance compensation under head of disability to Rs.96,805/-. Enhanced amount to be invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts with interest paid monthly to appellant.

Bhagwati Devi Vs Ramlal and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

(1 of 3)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 123/2018

¶4

Bhagwati Devi W/o Rameshchand B/c Kushwah, R/o Saoltiya Mohalla, Bakani Distt. Jhalawar Raj.

¶5

----Appellant/Claimant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ramlal S/o Narayna Lal B/c Gurjar, R/o Kankriya Thana Bakani, Distt. Jhalawar Driver Of Vehicle No. Rj14-U-1575

¶8

Hemant Kumar S/o Ramprasad B/c Brahman, R/o Julaniya Mohalla Bakani, Distt. Jhalawar Raj. Owner Of Vehicle No. Rj14-U-1575

¶9

The National Insurance Company Limited, Jhalawar Road Kota Insurance Company Of Vehicle No. Rj14-U1575

¶10

----Respondents/Non-Claimants

¶11

For Appellant : Mr. Rohit Khandelwal

¶12

For Respondent no.3 : Ms. Bharti Trivedi

¶13

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶14

Order

¶15

02/07/2018

¶16

Appellant has filed this appeal, challenging the award dated 5.10.2017 passed by the Tribunal, seeking enhancement of compensation amount.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the appellant as Rs.3,600/- per month, whereas, at the relevant time minimum wages fixed by the State of an unskilled worker were Rs.5,122/- per month. Learned counsel has not challenged the amount of compensation granted to the appellant under other heads but has only challenged the

¶18

(2 of 3 )

¶19

inadequacy of compensation amount granted to the appellant under the head of disability suffered by her.

¶20

Learned counsel for respondent no.3, has opposed the appeal.

¶21

Appellant had filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation on account of injuries suffered by her in the motor-vehicle accident which had occurred on 21.10.2015.

¶22

As per the minimum wages fixed by the State at the relevant time, even an unskilled worker was entitled to receive Rs.5,122/- per month. Hence, in the present case, Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the appellant as Rs.3,600/- per month. Appellant was aged between 41 to 45 years at the time of the accident, as is evident from the disability certificate Exhibit-50. Thus, the appropriate multiplier liable to be applied to work out the compensation amount liable to be paid to the appellant vis-à-vis permanent disability suffered by her would be ‘14’. As per Exhibit-50, appellant had suffered permanent disability to the extent of 9%. It has also been stated in Exhibit-50 that there was slight limping from right lower limb of the appellant.

¶23

Hence, the appellant would be entitled to receive compensation vis-à-vis permanent disability suffered by her to the tune of Rs.5,122/- x 12 x 14 x 9% = Rs.77,444/-. Appellant is also be entitled to receive an addition of 25% of the said amount towards her future prospects and the said amount comes to Rs.19,361/-.

¶24

(3 of 3 )

¶25

Thus, appellant would be entitled to receive Rs.96,805/-

¶26

under the head of disability suffered by her by way of compensation instead of Rs.58,320/- as granted by the Tribunal. Thus, appellant would be entitled to receive another sum of Rs.38,485/- under the head of disability suffered by her.

¶27

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. Impugned award dated 5.10.2017, is modified to the extent that the appellant would be entitled to receive Rs.1,61,485/- by way of compensation instead of Rs.1,23,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. Remaining terms and conditions of the impugned award shall remain the same. It is further ordered that the enhanced amount of compensation be invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts with some nationalized bank, initially for a period of three years and the interest accrued on the deposit shall be paid to the appellant Bhagwati Devi on monthly basis. Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Jhalawar, in the interest of the appellant shall invest the amount in Fixed Deposit Receipts in the name of the appellant in some nationalized Bank. The Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Jhalawar shall further apprise the appellant regarding the amount which has been granted to her by way of enhancement and the fact that the enhanced amount shall be invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts in some nationalized Bank for her benefit.

¶28

(SABINA)J.

¶29

Mohita/46

Bhagwati Devi v. Ramlal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwati Devi v. Ramlal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navneet Singh @ Naveen Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Mahendra @ Bulya Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajid and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Deepak Kumar Pandey and Ors.

Pradeep Kumar Vs Smt Sharda and Ors.

Ranjeet and Ors. Vs Abdul Kayam and Ors.