Partly allowed

Smt. Prem Kanwar and Ors. v. Budhapuri and Ors.

Rajasthan HC19 Dec 2022CMA/953/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan enhanced the compensation award in a motor accident claim. It increased the amount by considering a higher multiplier and future prospects, citing National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi. The appeal was partly allowed.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,06,296/- with interest @ 6% p.a. to be paid by the Insurance Company within eight weeks.

Smt. Prem Kanwar and Ors. Vs Budhapuri… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 953/2005

¶4

Smt. Prem Kanwar W/o Late Shri Heera Ram @ Heera Singh, Age 37 years,

¶5

Bheru Singh S/o Late Shri Heera Ram @ Heera Singh, Age 21 years,

¶6

Kishan Singh S/o Late Shri Heera Ram @ Heera Singh, Age 19 years,

¶7

Miss Manju D/o Late Shri Heera Ram @ Heera Singh, Age 14 years,

¶8

Miss Chinu D/o Late Shri Heera Ram @ Heera Singh, Age 7 years,

¶9

Prem Lata D/o Late Shri Heera Ram @ Heera Singh, Age 25 years,

¶10

Appellants/applicants No.4 & 5 are minors through their natural guardian mother Smt. Prem Kanwar appellant/applicant No.1.

¶11

All B/c Rawana Rajput, R/o Basni Kaviyan, Tehsil Jaitaran, District Pali.

¶12

----Appellants

¶13

Versus

¶14

Budhapuri S/o Shri Shankerpuri, B/c Goswami, R/o Aagewa Tehsil Jaitaran, District Pali (Driver & Owner of Tempo No.RJ-22P-1176.

¶15

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., through Divisional Manager, LIC Building Mandiya Road, Pali (Insurer of Tempo No.RJ-22-P1176).

¶16

Pannalal S/o Anda Ram, B/c Sirvi, R/o Thakarwas Tehsil Jaitaran, District Pali Driver & Owner of Motor Cycle Heero Honda No.RJ-19-12-M-1012)

¶17

----Respondents

¶18

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Arvind Samdariya
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Sanjeev Johari, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Lalit Parihar & Mr. Subhankar Johari.
	Mr. Manish Rajpurohit for Mr. Rakesh Arora.
	Mr. Pradeep Choudhary

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

(2 of 4)

[CMA-953/2005]

Order

19/12/2022

REPORTABLE

Instant misc. appeal has been filed by the appellantsclaimants against the judgment & award dated 21.12.2004 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat Camp Jaitaran, District Pali whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.3,96,768/- in favour of the appellantsclaimants with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.

¶26

While praying for enhancement, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal has erred in considering the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.7,641/- per month. Counsel submits that considering the age of the deceased i.e. 48 years, learned Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier of 13 instead of 6. Learned Tribunal has further committed error in not awarding the future prospects and consortium. It is settled law that the future prospects of advancement in life and career should also be sounded in terms of money to augment the multiplicand. It is prayed that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal may be enhanced.

¶27

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company while vehemently opposing the prayer of the appellants has submitted that amount granted by the Tribunal is fair and just. Therefore, no interference is required in the impugned judgment and award.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for the respondents and perused the award impugned.

¶29

(3 of 4)

¶30

[CMA-953/2005]

¶31

Considering the position of income of the deceased, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.7,641/-. However, considering the age of the deceased as 48 years, this Court is of the opinion that while calculating the amount of compensation, the multiplier of 13 ought to have been applied by the learned Tribunal instead of 6. Further, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.30,000/- only under the heads of funeral expenses, love and affection and loss of estate, which is also liable to be enhanced in the facts and circumstances of the case. Moreover, the future prospects are also required to be added while calculating the amount of compensation in the present case in view of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] . Accordingly, the re-computation of the award shall be as under :-

¶32

Income	: Rs.7,641/-	(per month)
Age	: 48 years
Multiplier	:13
Deduction Future Prospects	: 1/3 : 30%

¶33

Calculation: 7,641X12X13X1/2X30%= Rs10,33,064/-

¶34

Funeral Expenses, Love & Affection & Loss of Estate=Rs.70,000/-

¶35

Total amount of compensation : Rs.11,03,064/-

¶36

Amount awarded by the Tribunal : Rs.3,96,768/-

¶37

Enhanced amount : 11,03,064 – 3,96,768 = Rs.7,06,296/along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of passing of award.

¶38

(4 of 4)

¶39

[CMA-953/2005]

¶40

In view of the above, the amount of compensation awarded by learned Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.7,06,296/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of passing of award.

¶41

Accordingly, the civil misc. appeal is partly allowed. The amount of Rs.7,06,296/- (Seven Lakh Six Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Six only) shall be paid by the Insurance Company to the appellants-claimants, in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal vide order dt. 21.12.2004, within a period of eight weeks from today. If the enhanced amount is not paid within the stipulated period, the claimants-appellants shall be entitled to an interest @ 7% p.a on the said amount. The amount so deposited by the Insurance Company shall be deposited in the Saving Account of the claimants, detail of which shall be furnished by the claimants before the Tribunal.

¶42

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶43

127-MS/-

Smt. Prem Kanwar and Ors. v. Budhapuri and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Prem Kanwar and Ors. v. Budhapuri and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Vs State of Rajasthan

Poonam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Harmesh Singh @ Kalu Vs State of Rajasthan

National Insurance Co. Limited, Udaipur Vs Dalu Meena and Ors.

Smt. Devki Vs Jaikishan Vyas and Ors.

Karmi and Ors. Vs Ladu Ram and Ors.