Partly allowed

Smt. Shanta and Ors. v. Dasrath Singh and Ors.

Rajasthan HC14 Dec 2023CMA/1073/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1073/2004, the High Court partially allowed the appellants' appeal, enhancing motor accident compensation from Rs. 2,66,800 to Rs. 6,78,240. The court corrected the multiplier to 18, adjusted personal expenses to 1/4, and increased awards for future prospects, consortium, funeral expenses, and loss of estate.

What did the court decide?

The compensation is enhanced from Rs. 2,66,800 to Rs. 6,78,240, to be paid with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing the petition.

Smt. Shanta and Ors. Vs Dasrath Singh and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:43835]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1073/2004

¶4

Smt. Shanta, W/o Late Kanti Meena, Aged 22 years,

¶5

Ms. Nirma, D/o Kanti Meena, Aged 04 years, 3. Sh.Narendra, S/o Kanti Meena, Aged 2 years, 4. Ms. Deepa, D/o Kanti Meena, Aged ½ years, Appellant No. 02-04 are minors through Guardian appellant no.1 5. Sh.Savji, S/o Alka Meena, Aged 55 years, 6. Smt. Nani, W/o Savji Meena, Aged 50 years, All resident of Pipli “B”, Tehsil Kherwada, District Udaipur

¶6

----Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Dasrath Singh s/o Raghunath Singh Rajpoot, Resident of Gram Banewdi, P.S. Shree Nagar, District Ajmer. 2. Managing Director, Rajasthan Co-operative Dairy Federation Limited, Jaipur. Branch Goverdhan Vilas, Udaipur. 3. The New India Insurance Company Limited, 3 Bapu Bazar, Udaipur.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. SandeepSarupuria,Adv.
For Respondent No.3	: Mr. Sunil A. Vyas, Adv.
Insurance Company

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN Judgment

¶12

14/12/2023

¶13

The challenge in the present appeal is to the award dated 27.03.2004 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Salumbhar (A.D.J. No.2 Udaipur) on the file of M.A.C. Case No.296/2002, wherein and whereby the claim of the appellants for compensation was partly allowed granting a compensation of Rs.2,66,800 with interest.

[2023:RJ-JD:43835]

[CMA-1073/2004]

(2 of 3)

The present appeal is at the instance of the claimants. The contention of learned counsel appearing for the claimants is that the Tribunal has not fixed any compensation towards future prospects and also not properly given deduction considering the dependency and the multiplier applied is also not proper. The claimants also seek enhancement of the amount granted under conventional heads.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the insurance company justified the award of compensation. According to him, the appeal requires no interference from this Court.

¶19

Heard learned counsel for both the parties.

¶20

Undisputed facts are that the deceased was aged 20 years and he was a labourer in a mining area. His monthly income was assessed as Rs.1,800/-. The appropriate increase for the person self-employed and in the age group of below 40 years is 40%.

¶21

The deceased is survived by his parents, wife and three children, total dependents 6 in numbers. The appropriate deduction towards personal expenses should have been 1/4 and not 1/3 as adopted by the Tribunal. 7. The Tribunal applied the multiplier of 17 whereas the appropriate multiplier in the present case should be 18 for the persons in the age group of 15 to 20. The multiplier of 18 is adopted.

¶22

The Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, which shall be Rs.15,000/-. The Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love & affection as well as loss of consortium. The Tribunal should have granted Rs.40,000/- to each of the appellants, who are the parents, wife and children towards

[2023:RJ-JD:43835]

[CMA-1073/2004]

(3 of 3)

consortium and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate. The amount awarded in the form Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love and affection shall be adjusted towards loss of consortium.

¶27

Taking into account the above factors, the following amounts for compensation are arrived at:

¶28

1. Annual income of the deceased (1800 x 12)	21,600
2. Added: future prospects (40%)	8,640
3. Total annual income of the deceased (21,600+ 8,640)	30,240
4. Deducted : towards personal expenses (1/4)	7,560
5. Annual amount of dependency (30,240-7,560)	22,680
6. Multiplier to be applied	18
7. Total amount of dependency (22,680 x 18)	4,08,240
8. Added : Consortium to all claimants (40,000 x 6)	2,40,000
9. Added : Loss of estate	15,000
10. Added : Funeral expenses	15,000
Total entitlement of the appellants	6,78,240

¶29

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.2,66,800/- to Rs.6,78,240/-. The enhanced compensation shall be paid with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of deposition. The amount shall be deposited within two months from the date of this judgment.

¶30

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J

¶31

9-BhumikaP/NK

Smt. Shanta and Ors. v. Dasrath Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shanta and Ors. v. Dasrath Singh 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

The National Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Lajwanti and Ors.

Hukma Ram Vs Jagdish Prasad and Ors.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Ambu Kanwar and Ors.

Homa and Ors. Vs Dasrath Singh and Ors.

Smt. Hanifa and Ors. Vs Smt. Gamer Kanwar and Ors.

Smt. Panji and Ors. Vs Dasrath Singh and Ors.