Partly allowed

Raju Alias Rajendra v. Vijaypal Devendra and Ors.

Rajasthan HC8 Jan 2019CMA/2883/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award which granted only Rs. 1.4 lakh for 19.06% permanent disability. The High Court held the tribunal undervalued the claim and enhanced the compensation to Rs. 2.41 lakh based on income data.

What did the court decide?

Impugned award dated 23.04.2018 modified to enhance compensation to Rs.2,41,812 instead of Rs.1,40,744.

Raju Alias Rajendra Vs Vijaypal Devendra and Ors. — Medical Negligence | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RU'JASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2883/2018

¶4

Raju @ Rajendra son of Sitaram, age 28 years, by caste Kumawat, resident Ward No.3, Ajeetgarh, Tehsil Shrimadhopur, District Si kar (Raj .)

¶5

,.Ve rsu s*. .
ha> &: y$&( ?i , #&&@ .p ,@%,
7e* &;? &a:<,< ;pg , :@;q 9 @ , $'", tk
1. Vijaypal 4.- ~~@@dhe.~fJn +, q$4c of '~~~~~~~~~~d, ." <b' by caste Jat,
&-, >: &"%
resident @ Dlani Devda wali anipuraf~~~~ehsil Shahpura,
& \A,:
JaipmQDriver) us tf ;.
'-y?ppG' ""^^/A
2. ,F,ulchand Son of Shri Nathuram, by caste Jatybe8ident of
.$&$ad' 4
BEilaiyon ki Dhani, Khejroli Tehsil Chomu@Thana
Govindgarh, District J,.aipu;~~~~J$aj.) .@e&j, s ef:tfi (Owner)

¶6

d through Regional Jaipur (Insurance Iaimants/Respondents

¶7

For Appellant(s) For Respondent(s)

¶8

08/01/2019 . .. .

¶9

This appeal for enhancement of compensation is filed by the claimant-appellant against the judgment and award dated 23.04.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shahpura, District Jaipur (for short 'the tribunal'), whereby the ltribunal awarded a sum of Rs.l,40,744/as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till realisation.

¶10

¶11

It is submitted by learned counsel'for the appellant that as per disability certificate, the appellant suffered permanent disability to the extent of 19.06%; However, on this count, only Rs.18,000/- has been awarded by way of lum sum compensation.

¶12

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 has opposed the appeal and supported the impugned

¶13

judgment and award.

¶14

he claim-petition @ under Section 166 of Motor .&fa+@@ Ma eking compensation on tor vehicle accident no dispute that the claimant-inured sustai ability to the extent of 19.06%. The tribun ncome of the injured as Rs.4,914/- per month um wages fixed by the State Government at the injured was aged about 29 years at th fore, to work out the compensation multiplie applied in the present case. Hence, the appellant would be entitled to receive compensation vis-a-vis permanent disability suffered by him and the same comes to Rs.1,91,068/(4,914x12x17x19.06°/~). The appellant has been awarded a sum of Rs.9,600/towards hospitalisation, Rs. 10,000/towards operation charges, Rs.3,024/towards loss of income, Rs.3,120/towards medical bills, Rs.l0,000/towards conveyance charges, Rs.25,000/towards pain and sufferings, all of which has not been challenged

¶15

(3 of 3)

¶16

[CMA-2883/2018]

¶17

by either of the parties. Thus, the total amount of compensation receivable by the claimant comes to Rs.2,41,812/(1,91,068+9,600+3,024+3,120+10,000+25,000).

¶18

Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed. Impugned award dated 23.04.2018 is modified to the extent that the compensation amount receivable by the claimant is Rs.2,41,812/instead of Rs.1,40,744/- as awarded by the Tribunal. Remaining 1F.T Kip a.,.b:gh1;1. be the same. The * *" ,p sit the enhanced amiunt along with l.&$FJ% . ,. %. 1

¶19

the intere~~~d 9% per annum from the date of filing

¶20

date of payment with the Tribunal

¶21

hat the share of the be invested in fixed a period of 2 years aid to the claimants on

¶22

P ';", (PRAKASH GUPTA),J

Raju Alias Rajendra v. Vijaypal Devendra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Alias Rajendra v. Vijaypal Devendra 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

Smt Ummed Devi and Others Vs Gopal and Others

Shankar Lal Vs Reliance Gen Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others

Smt Rajan Devi and Ors. Vs Sajjan Singh and Ors.

Pradeep Kumar Meena S/O Mohan Lal Meena Vs Nathu Lal Mehta S/O Shri Mahadev Prasad Mehta

Smt. Manju Bai W/O Late Shri Harisingh @ Harinarayan Vs Nathu Lal Mehta S/O Shri Mahadev Prasad Mehta

Roshan Lal Vs Parmanand