Partly allowed

Smt Shanti Devi and Others v. Ram Prasad Jangid and Others

Rajasthan HC30 Jan 2019CMA/1132/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellants challenged compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for a road accident. The Tribunal applied an incorrect multiplier despite holding that the deceased was unmarried and providing future prospects. The appellate court recalculated compensation applying the correct multiplier and allowed the appeal partly.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed by the claimants is partly allowed; compensation is recalculated and increased to Rs. 5,23,600/-.

Smt Shanti Devi and Others Vs Ram Prasad Jangid and… — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1132/2013

¶3

I. Smt. Shanti Devi wife of Late Shri Jagdish Narayan, aged 50 years.

¶4

Om Prakash son of Late Shri Jagdish Narayan, aged 28 years. Both by caste Jangid, resident of village Kuthada Kalan, Thana Kanota, District Jaipur (Raj.)

¶5

,-r,csajr ,?+ ; 1- .,@rsus 7' ..$.$ , $&if _4: @,A_ fv, 1. Ram Prasad J.a~gl& &n:-of Babud ,&l-pgenbres dent of i d 77, ' .. -.-.& 6 p .\ ,;& Kajli Ki hani,,,f@/I@ge Kuthada Kalan, Tehsil'B'z$ssiFDistrict Jaipur ""f . - .&.. twy 'y %."< (Driver) _+e$g," A$&_ %* , & +g p;& 2. Babu eu &%?3angid son of Late Shri Gulla Ram, by tq$.$ Jangid, esid6fTkof 17, Kajalo Ki Dhani, Village Kuthada dadehsil c

¶6

This appea ncement of compensation is directed against the rd dated 24.01.2013 passed by the ~otor Accident Claims Tribunal, First, Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short 'the tribunal'), whereby, the tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,33,000/as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the tribunal committed an error in awarding lesser compensation. The tribunal erred in granting lesser amount towards future

¶8

(2 of 3)

¶9

[CMA-1132/2013] *

¶10

prospects of the deceased. The tribunal also erred in applying the multiplier of 13 on the basis of the age of the parents, whereas the multiplier of 18 should have been applied on the basis of the, age of the deceased.

¶11

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.1-insurance company has opposed the appeal.

1 I I -

claim-petition was :the,Act of 1988") by the claimants , , death of Ramesh @ h. , me of the deceased as i. r annum. The same has ies. As the deceased was erefore, in view of

¶16

16.03.2010. The tribu ,

¶17

Rs.3,000/- per month i. not been challenqed b

¶18

tional Insurance Ors., reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, an ad added towards future prospects of the deceased, which comes to Rs.l4,400/-. Thus, the income of the deceased comes to Rs.50400/(36000+14400). Keeping in view the fact that deceased was unmarried, one half of the said income is liable to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. Keeping in view the age as mentioned above, multiplier of 18 would be applied to work out the dependency of the ap.pellants. In this way, the amount of

¶19

¶20

¶21

(3 of 3) [CMA-1132/2013]

¶22

compensation comes to Rs.4,53,600/(50400x1/218). The claimants would be further entitled to receive a sum of Rs.70,000/- towards conventional heads. Thus, the total amount of compensation receivable by the claimants comes to R.5,23,600/-(453600+70000).

¶23

The appeal filed by the claimants is partly allowed.

Smt Shanti Devi and Others v. Ram Prasad Jangid and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Shanti Devi and Others v. Ram Prasad Jangid and Others

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

Smt. Rekha Devi W/O Late Shri Jagdish Vs Manoj Singh S/O Shri Bhanwar Singh

I C I C I Lombard Gen.Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Hem Raj and Another

Smt. Kailashi W/O Bacchu Singh Vs Gopal Prasad Jain S/O Soniram Jain

Smt Rekha and Ors. Vs Kedar Narayan

Smt Bimla Devi and Anr. Vs Nand Kishore and Ors.

Kailash Chandra Sharma Vs Mam Chand and Ors.