Allowed

Raju Soni v. Jitendra Kumar Nainawat and Ors.

Rajasthan HC23 Jul 2018CMA/2513/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal against the Tribunal's award in a motor vehicle accident claim, the High Court enhanced the compensation amount from Rs. 1,80,000 to Rs. 3,05,708 on the basis of a medical certificate indicating 27.45% permanent disability instead of the Tribunal's 20% assessment.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation increased to Rs. 3,05,708; the excess amount ordered to be invested in fixed deposit receipts.

Raju Soni Vs Jitendra Kumar Nainawat and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2513/2018

¶3

Raju Soni S/o Late Leelaram, B/c Sindhi Soni , R/o 1/778, Sector I, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶4

Versus

¶5

I = Jitendra Kumar Nainawat S/o Chhotu Ram Nainawat , R/o
H.no. 57, Phase Ii, Ipdjra JV;wgar, Jhalana Doongari Thana
".?" ? -
I I..--,
&Gandhinagar Z,L t .. Apa~~~JapurQty.fDrver -3 . -. .~. Of Motorcycle No.
: 4. % . .""f
1-4-d"393 ..".+ ? $I ,4z-.
4 --.
2. Purag %h'6nd Bidawat S/o Omprakash id$yyAb B/c Balai ,% e' .4. A ,
R/43;aW.no. 8-164, Mansarovar Garden, .sw@t;ti Nagar
* ,..
. c@?r&i,. + I$ "' New Delhi-110015 Registered Owner Of Mq$orcycle
Regis;t.ration No. Dl-4s-Cd-3963
" " .' -Y.fl... .,: "c.P., )&,*iff
3. United India "g9yfiiln+4 IgsurakeeJ ?$=28 $28 ,450m - p 2' ,,any .:&% Limited, Through
Regional Marla.kaey'""" ,- ;.,. * ,... ref3 s
2q$;&Regna;l$$lff;te -. s t2 ,avg:,k .,,$>++. Sahara Chambers,
* Z6;.+r &, 4 .:+$:;+ e%$d+sKcQ"%9
Ton k Road, JIJ~. .% r ':@I$qarqn.i2 eq Kg*.+fg.b : ,,,.a" AGa<tppPa ny Of Motorcycle No.
.. +$$ ,..% ., ,p,&3<,: E,i$$;&?:i,:$&$@%
DI-4S-Qj-3963,-. .fin .$ ,., v:! . Q a .$ 2*,( %".";'db"w >:,. <,.: . ,%::': >$hY
h K,%&if z.2- @<# &2%* < + . $: %: "
q,$ &$ % &p %. .a;*r. %ds:t$
----Respondents
d i t, vd@z.@;$;f$A:$3xp$$;7p 335;. : $&.&&$@T %+&' u
For Appellant(s.)
3:; $8 5:- $%G
For esondent No.3 : $id f.if a-i arilshtid&rashar -3rm .
, $3 . .-.7 4 ..* * J . , . - 5%. kt'$ :, +:.p: Wh,?>, %?,': .-,
$.,, ggw<&?&j$;,j$;,h4;s$:: &'bj92ni;$:s?$
. I ,*: .a .)-- ..M-L:J: y h.p138;4,z444
@g., .,-i;. < g; . $ 8 $3 -~ Gs.'+ ::
' '
N, &eE%;fi $g~p&g%$p2p$#!.1$c
gIIOEs &BIN A
6 ,&!:+GG5k+ ./l ./l
h% $$j$
b;#&e::hF~$$$$%9$%i& W~-hs>fpP@ 5 s.2 flp9:; ,."?'sag 52 $xLC-.p P , * * p
,$! ~&-2&+.. &-2&+.. ?T&yk$ . b . e*p:s;. I.>.. p.2

¶6

$gp&g%$p2p$#!.1$c gIIOEs &BIN A 6 ,&!:+GG5k+ ./l ./l h% $$j*$ _b;#&e~~::hF$$$$%9$%i&_ W~-hs>fpP@ 5 s.2 flp9:; ,*."?'sag 52 $xLC-.p P ,* * * p ,$! ~&-2&+.. &-2&+.. ?T&yk$ . b . e*p:s;. I.>.. p.2 Appellant has filed this appeal, challenging the award dated 03.04,2018 passed by the Tribunal, seeking enhancement of compensati'on amount. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that as per Ex.15, the 'appellant had suffered permanent physical disability to the extent of 27.45% whereas the Tribunal has taken the same as 20%. The amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal was on , +

(2 of?)

[CMA-2513/2018]

a lower side.

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

¶11

Appellant had filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 seeking compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in the motor-vehicle accident, which had ' E' occurred on 05.08.2015. .e'% * ?.I,'-. '1 . r"a , . - 1 \ " t-'$ ri ,.a Pp-3 v. ,: $. "& .;, ?&@** + '"- @ 5, x-<. g &$ 4% P" .rL jf. ;$fF?* As per ~~h,bt-15 3'~,6., v. disability certificate (copy CP I @,the same has 2 $p'-'yr b-&$-, i* "%$ 3 been pld~ed;on record by the learned counsel for&h&,appellant %* &k3 .Qiad f ' .++ during the course of arguments), appellant had&uffered permanent p;hy8c 27.45%. The said certificate 6a; been ctors. Hence, there is no reason to doubt a,id certificate. -

¶12

working with Sharma Modern Arts and w r month. However, the said certificate as the person who had The opposite "side ha le right to crossb examine the' person w h.q+g.ad&$sugd_tl;r;re56^a:id certificate to test the #-a:$ a , pq* . =vq w * Sa3r -4 $:,? ' 2 , '." ~lp; "'2 T~ . t s '4 genuineness of the certificate. Hence, income of the appellant is liable to be taken as Rs.5,122/- per month in view of the minimum wages fixed by the State at the relevant time,.

¶13

Appellant was aged between 56 to 60 years at the time of accident. Hence, the appropriate multiplier to work out the amount' bf~;ompensation v'is-5-vis permanent disability suffered by him would be '9:

¶14

Thus, in all, appellant would be entitled to receive Rs.5,122/x 12 x 9 x 27.45% = Rs. 1,51,846/- by way of compensation vis-2vis permanent disability suffered by him. Appellant would be further entitled to receive an addition of 10% of the said amount - $p towards loss of his future prospects and the said amount comes to

¶15

Admittedly, sum total of r;i the pedial 8 .2r :, bills proved on record by -. . , .1; kn. ". % - ".. " @@'k 6. A. 4 ,, I .. 8 .$ P, ,.g the appellant ar~+$o:~th$. ?&, &&@@& .. % %me of-~s.41;'178&f . . . C. a'+-j& . pT" & ;'z,'y $ ;r Learnedl tounsel for the appellant has su&mji&e+d that the w- %>," ehc ", 'S.q : %,"* &Ak ; . _G>{_ d - appella6&$ad remained admitted in the hospital for ,X5 days. .t%Cf' " towards

¶16

¶17

and the nature of entitled to receive of amenities of

life.

$! I
.

Rs. 15,000/-

A:*.- % k 3-.u-.egp w ... :wmsw Thu& the appell~~f~.~~d:$ "., 3i +*$" Q %% b,qeqkf w rtled to receive, in all, ,4

¶22

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. Impugned award dated 03.04.2018, is modified to the extent that the appellant would be entitled to, receive Rs.3,05,708/- by way of compensation instead 1 of Rs.1,80,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. Remaining terms and conditibhd of the award shall remain the same. It is further

(4 of ?)

[CMA-2513/2018]

orde'red t'hat'the e'nhaned amount of compensation be invested in Fixed Deposit eieits with some nationaliied bank, initial17y for a period of three y,ears and the interest accrued on the deposit shall be paid to the appellant on monthly basis. Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Jaipur Metro, in the interest of the appellant shall invest the amount in Fixed Deposit Receipts in the name of I the appellant in some nationalized Bank. The Secretary, District ***;qe** T " w -.. i%&\ iVgI "# q 47 Legal Services ut$1or6,,3i.ur ,gMietrb sk$alJ Tu,rther apprise the % Q" 47 ,;P% ,, *. : %y&b % appellant rega.r;dlng the amount which has been--g@gted to him by i. <; .&? y' a A I?+ way of eda&'cement and the fact that the enhanced-a%munt .;".e,-Ged shall 4323" -: .') ,L% " % be inve3ed in Fixed Deposit Receipts in some natipnalzed Bank

¶27

for his b"e.n.efit:

Raju Soni v. Jitendra Kumar Nainawat and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Soni v. Jitendra Kumar Nainawat 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

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.

Sohan Lal Vs Narendra Alias Nariya and Ors.

Shri Thandi Ram Meena Vs Mohammed Irshad Khan and Ors.

Mohan Lal Sharma Vs Ram Chandra and Ors.