Partly allowed

Kailash Chandra Sharma v. Mam Chand and Ors.

Rajasthan HC30 Jan 2019CMA/3706/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against a motor accident compensation award. The court recalculated the entitlement based on minimum wage, added loss of future prospects, and awarded medical, pain, and stress damages, enhancing the total compensation to Rs.3,30,337/-.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award was modified enhancing compensation to Rs.3,30,337/-, including interest at 7.5% p.a., to be invested in a fixed deposit.

Kailash Chandra Sharma Vs Mam Chand and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3706/2006

¶3

Kailash Chandra Sharma son of Shri Satyanarayan Sharma, resident of Ratan Bhawan, Joshiyon Ka Mohalla, Behind Lata Cinema, Jhotwara, Jaipur.

¶4

----Appellant/claimant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mamchand son of Shri Raghuveer Singh, Resident of Village Khata Hota, District Bagawat (U.P.) At present Driver, Utter Pradesh Transport Corporation (Driver Bus No. UP-15P-9684). 2. Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Corporation, Merath (U.P.) through Regional Manager (Owner Bus No. UP-15P-9684)

¶7

----Respondents

¶8

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Govind Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. NS Chaudhary

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶10

Order

¶11

30/01/2019

¶12

This appeal for enhancement of compensation is directed against the judgment and award dated 03.06.2006 passed by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.6 Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short ‘the trial court’), whereby, the ‘trial court’ awarded a sum of Rs.1,92,777/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trial court committed an error in awarding lesser compensation. As per the disability certificate Ex.63, the appellant had suffered permanent physical disability to the extent of 60%. However, the tribunal only granted compensation to the tune of

¶14

(2 of 4)

¶15

[CMA-3706/2006]

¶16

Rs.1,50,000/- which was inadequate and the same requires enhancement. Compensation granted by the tribunal under the other heads was also inadequate.

¶17

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has opposed the appeal and supported the impugned judgment and award.

¶18

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶19

The claim-petition was filed by the appellant seeking compensation on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 4/3/2004. There is no dispute that appellant was aged about 45 years at the time of accident. As per the permanent disability certificate (Ex.63), the appellant suffered permanent physical disability to the extent of 60%. It was the case of the appellant that the he was earning Rs.5600/per month. But to prove the same no cogent evidence was produced by the appellant. Therefore, the income of the appellant is to be taken on the basis of minimum wages fixed by the State. At the relevant time, prevalent rate of minimum wages fixed by the State Government was Rs.1560/- per month i.e. Rs.18720/per annum. Therefore, the income of the appellant is to be taken as Rs.18720/- per annum. Keeping in view of the percentage of permanent disability suffered by the appellant and the age of the appellant, the appellant would be further entitled to receive an addition of 25% towards loss of his future prospects. This amount comes to Rs.4,680/-. Thus, the income of the deceased comes to

¶20

(3 of 4) [CMA-3706/2006]

¶21

Rs.23,400/- (18720+4,680). Keeping in view the age of the appellant, multiplier of 14 would be applied to work out the compensation vis-a-vis permanent disability suffered by him. In this way, the compensation comes to Rs.1,96,560/(23400x14x60/100).

¶22

The appellant had remained in the hospital for 22 days. Hence, the appellant would be entitled to receive Rs.11,000/towards hospitalization charges. The sum total of medical bills proved on record was Rs.12,777/-. The same has not been disputed by either of the parties. Further, keeping in view the age of the appellant and the nature of the injuries suffered by him, appellant would be entitled to receive Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain & sufferings and loss of amenities of life. Appellant would be further entitled to receive Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges and special diet. Thus, the total amount of compensation comes to Rs.3,30,337/- (196560+11,000+12777+100000+ 10000).

¶23

Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed. Impugned award dated 03.06.2006 is modified to the extent that the compensation amount receivable by the claimants is Rs.3,30,337/- instead of Rs.1,92,777/- as awarded by the Tribunal. Remaining terms and conditions of the award shall be the same. The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced amount along with the interest @ 7.5% 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 initially for a period of 2

¶24

(4 of 4)

¶25

[CMA-3706/2006]

¶26

years and the interest accrued thereon shall be paid to the claimants on monthly basis.

¶27

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶28

Mohit62

Kailash Chandra Sharma v. Mam Chand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Chandra Sharma v. Mam Chand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

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 Shanti Devi and Others Vs Ram Prasad Jangid and Others

Smt Rekha and Ors. Vs Kedar Narayan

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