Allowed

Sohan Lal v. Narendra Alias Nariya and Ors.

Rajasthan HC23 Jul 2018CMA/1427/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court decided an appeal under S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1427/2018. The single judge allowed the appeal, enhancing the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the First Schedule to Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,66,000 granted, to be invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts. The relief is granting enhanced compensation vis-a-vis permanent physical disability.

Sohan Lal Vs Narendra Alias Nariya and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶2

BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1427/2018

¶4

Sohan La1 S/o Shri Gopi Lal B/c Prajapat , R/o Village Gumanpura, Teh. And Distt. Bundi Raj.

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

I. Narendra @ Nariya S/o Shri Kalu Lal B/c Meena , R/o 7 "W fk 6 4 $ r ,% Village Guman,p,~lra,-Tkh. And Bbtg. + a Bundi Raj. Driver

¶8

Mahadev-rMeena S/o Shri Madan La1 B/c Meena , R/o i. &-v. i - 4. a Villagb'~urgapura, 3 -:. Post Bundi Ka Gothda, Te,h. Hindoli, i

¶9

Qistt. Bundi Raj. Owner

¶10

The Iffco Tokiyo General Insurance Co. Limited , Regional &FT $%+ %..% Office, 8, ~~t~~~~~;&&&:@~~Gan p ati Plaja, M,i. "~~it d % f $ b-.\8i %%a4 rtj-k:P :r: ** ,P4 " ".' 0 . ' * db h a+ 5 "w? * : .- Road, Jaipur ~hrough' m-h %. b - * @ -- , egjbnal,Planger Ins. Co. 7,x pl. , * %. i ,d 4.' " ' $ .J's - w. 3 \ *. -, * ----Respondents

¶11

For Respondent No.3 : . iVi LA gi$ed$ -I ,A bin
?$ 6 , : ,. . ;;; k * '
4 0 , yea i,? r'Ky ' %$r;l
#@32@.. 3~&@,d z&.**m &%@ && ";*h<%$2
e&z"=@%t&a;g:fl-*&3*?$$ *&&&q$$
ij$$; ?$, . 2 $&>. j i,; ",-Ber &j& -j$)"-$"
HON1&LE ~kg. J'l$SFICE SABINA
L. ,., ai a

¶12

Judament / Order
qy$v,r$~~sf ca&,$ y, g"-< ws 9 Li ... & m'w* % '. ?\3 f W*>+M*,.V & .$ .?*"ii

¶13

Appellant has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 7.12.2017 passed by the Tribunal, seeking enhancement of compensation amount.

¶14

Learned c~unsel for the appellant has submitted that as per Ex.11 disability certificate issued by the Board of Doctors, appellant had suffered permanent physical disability to the extent

¶15

(2 of 4)

¶16

[CMA- 1427/2018]

¶17

of 20%. Tribunal has erred in taking the same as 9%. Amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal under other heads was also on a lower side.

¶18

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 has opposed the appeal.

¶19

.Appellant had filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation on account of " .!;% 6 -,(pd t-2"~ .,. injuries suffered by..&him+ ,n.,tbe n 'y&,cle accident which had "' 4, 'P occurred on 7,~1.~~010.

¶20

As $qr-&x.11 (photo copy placed on record by the learned --> 'Y counsel for the appellant during the course of arguments) appellant had suffe sability to the extent of 20%. The said ed by the Board of Doctors. Hence, there bt the genuineness of the said certificate.

¶21

Appellant was a years at the time of accident. Hence, appr rkout the dependency of the injured vis-a-vi disability suffered by him would be '14'. % d* A+*+ P. \ T % 'Xa . 2 e

¶22

Although, it wasc ppellant that he was earning Rs. 15,000/per month but in the absence of any documentary evidence on record in this regard, income of the appellant was liable to be taken as Rs. 3,000/- per month as per minimum wages fixed by the State at the relevant time.

¶23

Thus, appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 3000X12x14x20°/~= Rs. 1,00,800/by way of compensation vis-a-vis permanent physical suffered by him. Appellant would be further entitled to

¶24

receive an addition of 25% of the said amount towards loss of his future prospects and the said amount comes to Rs. 25,200/-.

¶25

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant had remained admitted in the hospital for one day. Hence, the appellant would be entitled to receive Rs. 500/towards hospitalisation expenses.

¶26

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the nu ""i F -f h. w-. . p4 @"-i sum total of the medi.?albiil s XplacedY 6n 'tecord by the appellant L with regard totreatment undergone by him is Rs. 845/-. e As ~~PEX.I.I, appellant had suffered compression fracture . 4 ,\ --"' lumber vertebra. Thus, appellant would be entitled to receive Rs. 1,00,000/- towards pai5ga,f~$;$~~~@+ a,nf19Aloss of amenities of life. &J &)k2 %&T,&w*~ ."? * .., , 7%4$@%& 8%$ Appellant would be&gbh$&?- .&, *.A bj -ai A qtIe@*ko jxk+3e.g pd ~~~ip8 A,>vLrqceive -;%.., Rs. 15,000/3i <,sq~5.%? .% F @& q %. p&<i L towards transportation e~"@efi~~%ifi~'seci.al died etc.

¶27

entitled to receive Rs* ~~~~pAbyw~ygf compensation instead 8 ;a ,p '@ * *3 & $ ,W.d .%. t. -3 * k g .+a. - -3 of Rs. 1,46,000/awarded by the ~ribunal. Remaining terms and conditions of the award shall remain unchanged. It is further ordered that the enhanced amount of compensation be invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts with a nationalised Bank initially, for a period of three years and the interest accrued upon the deposit shall be paid to the appellant on monthly basis. The Secretary District Legal Services Authority, Bundi shall invest the amount in F.D.R. in the name of the appellant in some nationalised Bank. The

¶28

(4 of 4)

¶29

[CMA-1427/2018]

¶30

Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Bundi shall apprise the appellant regarding the amount which has been granted to him by way of enhancement and the fact that the enhanced amount shall be invested in F.D.R. in some nationalised bank for his benefit.

Sohan Lal v. Narendra Alias Nariya and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohan Lal v. Narendra Alias Nariya 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

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt Prakash Kanwar

Ramesh Vs Bahadur Singh and Ors.

Smt Leela Devi and Ors. Vs Mohd Yunus and Ors.

Shri Thandi Ram Meena Vs Mohammed Irshad Khan and Ors.

Raju Soni Vs Jitendra Kumar Nainawat and Ors.

Mohan Lal Sharma Vs Ram Chandra and Ors.