Partly allowed

Pappu Qureshi and Others v. Shahabuddin and Others

Rajasthan HC6 Aug 2019CMA/1009/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellants appealed against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award of Rs.4.23 lakhs for the death of Rukhsana. The High Court enhanced the award to Rs.7.33 lakhs by applying future prospects (40%) and adding conventional heads, including investing the excess in a fixed deposit.

What did the court decide?

Impugned award modified; compensation enhanced to Rs.7,33,390; excess invested in a 2-year fixed deposit.

Pappu Qureshi and Others Vs Shahabuddin and Others — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

This appeal for enhancement of compensation is directed against the judgment and award dated 16.07.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Rajasthan State Cooperative Tribunal, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.4,23,000/as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim p.eti%i:on.

¶2

Learn'ed counsel for the appellants "has submitted that the Tribun'al committed an error in awarding lesser compensation. 4, The rib;;nal erred in not awarding any amount towards future prospects of the deceased. The, @ - Tribunal also erred in awarding q * a- -% lesser a mo u n t to wa rdjsb:&o n--:e:i:$,dr h'eads..

¶3

I Ur "f "+P * n.". On the othet: h.,irnd:, -1:ea.rne.d ~o.un.sel for the respondent

¶4

No.3 Insurance Company has opposed the appeal.

¶5

I have considered the rival Submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and' have perused the material

¶6

The claim-$etitio,n was filed by the appellants seeking compensation on account of death ofaRukhsana in a motor vehicle bw; 4s p:J t 4 4 < 2 "* $ <I C" accident which occurredeon 1*7".04f2&11. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3,500/- per month. However, at the relevant time, prevalent rate of minimum wages fixed by the State Government was Rs.3,510/-. Thus, the income of the deceased is assessed as Rs.3,510/- per month i.e. Rs.42,120/- per annum. As the deceased was aged 40 years at the time of accident, therefore, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi &

¶7

Ors., reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, an addition of 40% is to be added towards future prospect of the deceased, which comes to Rs.16,848/per annum. Thus, the annu,aI income of the deceased comes to Rs. 58,9681-(4,2 120+ 16848): Keeping in view the number of depende'nts, one fou,rth (114) of the said income is * to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. Looking to the age of the deceased, multiplier of 15 would be applied to work ut?the. deendency of th;e;claimants. In this way, 'C r ?:a $ is e. P the amount ,,,x,pf( compensation comes to. Rs.6,63,390/- a. (58968~3pxi5). The claimants would be also en tit led^ to receive **pw ~s.70,00B/- towards conventional heads. Thus, the total amount of compensation receivabli;' "b'y the -claimants comes to

¶8

Accordingly, th<is= appeal is partly allowed. Impugned award dated 16.07.20.13 is niodifi-ed to the extent that the _r_ compensation amount tz re,ceivdb~e %E **_2_** 1 .: by the claimants is **P** & **_P_** Rs.7,33,390/instead cj:f ;R~.:4,33~00Q/- as awarded by the **_a_** "' ., Tribunal. Remaining terf~s7and'~con.d"itions of the award shall be the ''? 4 $ $" ,+ >;% 5:- same. The Insurance Cblnpa'ny ~ta shali'd'k$sif the enhanced amount along with the interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till date of payment with the Tribunal within a period of two months from today. It is ordered that the share of the enhanced amount of the compensation shall be invested in fixed deposit with a nationalised bank for a period of 2 years and the interest accrued thereon shall be paid to the claLmants on monthly basis.

¶9

Mohit Rohila 114

Pappu Qureshi and Others v. Shahabuddin and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Qureshi and Others v. Shahabuddin and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bajaj Allianz Gen Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sheela Devi and Ors.

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Smt. Manju Kanwar W/O Late Ranjeet Singh

Rekha Sharma D/O Shri Jai Prakash Bhinda W/O Shri Sandeep Kumar Shastri Vs Shri Sandeep Shastri S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad Shastri

Guddi and Others Vs Mukesh Kumar and Others

Manish Kumar S/O Vishnu Kumar Choudhary Vs Nagar Palika Board through Chairman Nagar Palika Mukandgarh

Raj Singh Chauhan Vs Balbir Singh and Others