Allowed

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Pukhraj Jain and Others

Rajasthan HC7 Oct 2023CMA/2283/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged an enhancedaward of compensation against the insurer and the vehicle owner. The High Court held that compensation cannot be apportioned against a single driver in a composite negligence case where the employer is not impleaded, as vicarious liability makes the employer primarily liable.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed; the impugned order was quashed subject to remand for enhancement of compensation.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pukhraj Jain and… — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:33109]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2283/2010

¶4

New India Assurance Company Limited, Through Its Regional Manager, Regional Office At II^nd Floor, South Block, Nehru Place, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Pukhraj Jain S/o Shri Ghasi Lal Jain, R/o 3128, First Floor, Shiv Shakti Textiles Market, Ring Road, Surat At Present Khetri Nagar, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu.

¶8

----Claimant-Respondent

¶9

Jiya Ram S/o Shri Raghunath Ram, R/o Jakhado Ki Dhani, Narva, Plice Station Soornagar, District Jodhpur. (Driver & Owner of Vehicle No. RJ-19-1G-3129)

¶10

----Non Claimant-Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mrs. Manju Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni for Mr. Virendra Agrawal

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶13

Order

¶14

07/10/2023

¶15

1- vihykFkhZ chek daiuh }kjk ;g vihy /kkjk&173 eksVj okgu vf/kfu;e&1988 ds rgr U;k;ky; eksVj nq?kZVuk okn vf/kdj.k ¼vij ftyk U;k;k/kh'k½] [ksrM+h ¼ftls vkxs ^vf/kdj.k* ds uke ls lacksf/kr fd;k tk,xk½ }kjk Dyse ;kfpdk la[;k&101@2009] iq[kjkt tSu cuke th;kjke o vU; esa ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 29-06-2010 ¼ftls vkxs ^vk{ksfir fu.kZ;* ds uke ls lacksf/kr fd;k tk,xk½ ds fo#) izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

¶16

2- jsLiksaMsaV uacj 1 ¼ftUgsa vkxs nkokdrkZ ds uke ls lacksf/kr fd;k tk,xk½ }kjk vf/kdj.k ds le{k] Lo;a ds eksVj okgu nq?kZVuk esa vkgr gks tkus ds QyLo:i Dyse izkIr djus gsrq Dyse ;kfpdk izLrqr dh x;h FkhA vf/kdj.k }kjk mDr Dyse ;kfpdk esa ;kph dks dqy 15]08]533@& #i;s

[2023:RJ-JP:33109]

[CMA-2283/2010]

(2 of 6)

dh {kfriwfrZ jkf'k e; C;kt 6 izfr'kr lkykuk dh nj ls fnyokbZ x;h gSA mDr vkns'k ls O;fFkr gksdj gLrxr vihy] vihykaV dh vksj ls {kfriwfrZ jkf'k esa la'kks/ku fd;s tkus gsrq izLrqr dh x;h gSA

¶21

3- nkSjkus cgl vf/koDrk vihykaV chek daiuh dk rdZ jgk gS fd vf/kdj.k }kjk vkgr dh vk; 5]000@& :i;s izfrekg fu/kkZfjr dh xbZ gS] tks dkQh vf/kd gSA tcfd oDr ?kVuk vkgr diM+s dk O;kikjh gS vkSj mlds }kjk viuh vk; ds laca/k esa dksbZ Bksl nLrkost izLrqr ugha fd, x, FksA fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykaV dk ;g Hkh rdZ jgk gS fd uD'kk ekSdk ds vuqlkj ?kVuk lM+d ds chp esa gqbZ gS] ftl dkj.k iz'uxr okgu pkyd dh mis{kk ugha ekuh tk ldrhA fo}ku vf/koDRkk vihykaV chek dEiuh dk ,d rdZ ;g Hkh jgk fd vf/kdj.k }kjk {kfriwfrZ jkf’k ij C;kt Hkh vR;f/kd fnyok;k x;k gS] ftls Hkh de fd;k tkosA vr% mijksDr vk/kkjksa ij chek dEiuh dh vksj ls izLrqr vihy Lohdkj dh tkdj fo}ku vf/kdj.k ds vk{ksfir fu.kZ; dks fujLr fd;s tkus dh izkFkZuk dh x;hA

¶22

4- blds foijhr fo}ku vf/koDrk nkokdrkZ dh vksj ls mijksDr rdkZsa dk fojks/k djrs gq, fo}ku vf/kdj.k ds fu.kZ; dh iqf"V fd;s tkus rFkk chek dEiuh dh vihy dks [kkfjt fd;s tkus dh izkFkZuk dh x;hA 5- nksuksa i{kksa dh cgl lquh x;hA vihy i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA 6- ;g vihy] vihykaV chek dh vksj ls vf/kdj.k ds vk{ksfir fu.kZ; dks fujLr djok;s tkus gsrq izLrqr dh x;h gSA nkokdrkZ dh vksj ls fo}ku vf/kdj.k ds fu.kZ; ds fo#) dksbZ vihy izLrqr ugha dh x;h gSA 7- tgka rd chek dEiuh dh vksj ls yh x;h ;g vkifŸk fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk erd dh vk; dk fu/kkZj.k xyr :i ls djrs gq, vR;f/kd {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnyokbZ gSA bl laca/k esa vihy i=koyh ds voyksdu ls izdV gksrk gS fd ekeys dh ?kVuk fnukad 08-11-2006 dh crkbZ x;h gS rFkk oDr ?kVuk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dks 50 o"kZ vk;q dk gksuk crkrs gq, diM+s dk O;olk; dj 65&70 gtkj :i;s izfrekg vk; vftZr djuk crk;k x;k gSA fdarq blds laca/k esa dksbZ Bksl nLrkost izLrqr ugha fd, gSaA ,slh fLFkfr esa fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dh dk;Z dh izdfr

[2023:RJ-JP:33109]

[CMA-2283/2010]

(3 of 6)

dks ns[krs gq, mldh ekfld vk; 5]000@& :i;s rn~uqlkj 60]000@& :i;s okf"kZd vk; fu/kkZfjr dh xbZ FkhA bl laca/k esa chek daiuh dk rdZ gS fd fcuk dksbZ Bksl nLrkost ds fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dh ekfld vk; 5]000@& :i;s fu/kkZfjr dh xbZ gS tks dkQh vf/kd gSA fdarq fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dh ekfld vk; esa Hkfo"; esa gksus okyh c<+ksrh ugha dh xbZ FkhA ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g U;k;ky; fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dh 5]000@& :i;s izfrekg fu/kkZfjr vk; dks lgh le>rh gSA

¶27

8- gLrxr nq?kZVuk esa jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 ds 'kjhj ds fofHkUu Hkkxksa mlds eqag] vka[k lhus esa xaHkhj pksVs vkuk vkSj cka;s gkFk dks dkVk x;k gS] ftuds lkewfgd izHkko ls jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 ds 'kjhj esa dqy 90 izfr’kr LFkk;h fu;ksZX;rk vkuk ik;k x;k gSA tSlk fd izn'kZ&14, LFkkbZ v;ksX;rk izek.ki= ds voyksdu ls Li"V gSA fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk Hkh jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dh 90 izfr'kr LFkkbZ fu;ksZX;rk dks vk/kkj ekudj 90 izfr'kr vk; dh gkfu gksuk ik;k x;k gSA ftlesa ge dksbZ gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha le>rs gSaA rnuqlkj jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dh ekfld vk; 5]000@& #i;s dk 90 izfr’kr 4]500@& #i;s gksrk gS tks jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dks Hkfo"; esa gksus okyh vk; dh ekfld {kfr gSA oDr ?kVuk vihykFkhZ dh vk;q 50 o"kZ gksuk crk;k x;k gSA ftldk [k.Mu ugha gks ldk gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dks Hkfo"; esa gksus okyh vk; dh {kfriwfrZ dh x.kuk gsrq jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dh vk;q dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, 11 dk xq.kd yxk;k x;k gS] tks lgh gSA blesa ge dksbZ gLrs{ki fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha le>rs gSaA rnuqlkj vihykFkhZ dks Hkfo"; esa gksus okyh vk; dh dqy {kfr 4]500 x 12 x 11 = 5]94]000@& #i;s jkf'k fnyokbZ xbZ gS] ftlesa ge dksbZ gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha le>rs gSaA

¶28

9- vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dks mlds bZykt ds nkSjku nok vkfn ij [kpZ gqbZ jkf’k fpfdRlk ds en esa dqy 8]94]533@& :i;s dh jkf'k fnyokbZ xbZ gSA blesa ge dksbZ gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha le>rs gSaA

(4 of 6)

[2023:RJ-JP:33109]

[CMA-2283/2010]

10vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k 1 dks 'kkjhfjd o ekufld ihM+k vkSj Hkfo"; esa rjDdh ls oafpr gksus ds en esa 25]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k fnyokbZ xbZ gSA blesa ge dksbZ gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha le>rs gSaA 11fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k&1 dks mijksDr lHkh enksa esa dqy 15]08]533@& :i;s dh {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnyokbZ xbZ gS] ftls ge fdlh Hkh izdkj ls vR;f/kd gksuk ugha ikrs gSaA

¶33

12chek dEiuh dh vksj ls ,d vkifŸk ;g Hkh yh xbZ gS fd ?kVuk lM+d ds e/; esa n'kkZbZ xbZ gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa dsoy chekÑr okgu ds pkyd dh mis{kk ugha ekuh tk ldrh cfYd nksuksa okgu pkydksa dh cjkcj dh mis{kk ekuh tkdj nksuksa okgu pkydksa ij {kfriwfrZ dk nkf;Ro fu/kkZfjr fd;k tkuk pkfg, FkkA bu ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa bl U;k;ky; dk ekuuk gs fd oDr ?kVuk jsLiksaMsaV uEcj&1 vkgr iq[kjkt okgu esa cSBk gqvk Fkk] u fd okgu pyk jgk FkkA ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g ekeyk dEiksftV usXyhtsal dk ekeyk gSA ^^dEiksftV usXyhtsal** ds ekeys esa ihfM+r O;fDr@DysesaV] nq?kZVuk esa fyIr nksuksa okguksa ds pkyd] Lokeh o chek dEiuh vkfn vFkok fdlh ,d okgu ds pkyd] Lokeh] chek dEiuh ds fo#) Dyse ;kfpdk izLrqr dj ldrk gS o lEiw.kZ Dyse jkf’k izkIr dj ldrk gSA tSlk fd fl)kUr mPpre U;k;ky; us vius U;kf;d n`"Vkar (2015) 9 Supreme Court Cases 273, Khenyei Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited And Others ds ekeys esa izfrikfnr fd;k gS %&

¶34

“22.1. In the case of composite negligence, the plaintiff/claimant is entitled to sue both or any one of the joint tortfeasors and to recover the entire compensation as liability of joint tortfeasors is joint and several.

¶35

22.2. In the case of composite negligence, apportionment of compensation between two tortfeasors vis-a-vis the plaintiff/claimant is not permissible. He can recover at his option whole damages from any of them.

¶36

22.3. In case all the joint tortfeasors have been impleaded and evidence is sufficient, it is open to the court/Tribunal to determine inter se extent of

(5 of 6)

[2023:RJ-JP:33109]

[CMA-2283/2010]

composite negligence of the drivers. However, determination of the extent of negligence between the joint tortfeasors is only for the purpose of their inter se liability so that one may recover the sum from the other after making whole of the payment to the plaintiff/claimant to the extent it has satisfied the liability of the other. In case both of them have been impleaded and the apportionment/extent of their negligence has been determined by the court/Tribunal. In the main case one joint tortfeasor can recover the amount from the other in the execution proceedings.

¶41

22.4. It would not be appropriate for the court/Tribunal to determine the extent of composite negligence of the drivers of two vehicles in the absence of impleadment of other joint tortfeasors. In such a case, impleaded joint tortfeasor should be left. In case be so desires, to sue the other joint tortfeasor in independent proceedings after passing of the decree or award.”

¶42

13mijksDr U;kf;d n`"Vkar esa izfrikfnr fl)kUr ls Li"V gS fd jsLiksaMsaV la[;k&1 iq[kjkt tks fd nq?kZVukxzLr cksysjks xkM+h ds ihNs cSBk Fkk] fd fdlh Hkh izdkj ls ;ksxnk;h mis{kk ugha ekuh tk ldrh rFkk jsLiksaMsaV la[;k&1 iq[kjkt }kjk cksysjks xkM+h ds pkyd] Lokeh o chek dEiuh dks i{kdkj ugha cuk;s tkus ls mlds i{k esa fu/kkZfjr {kfriwfrZ jkf’k esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dh dksbZ dVkSrh ugha dh tk ldrhA

¶43

14vr% mijksDr foospu vuqlkj ukWu&DysesaV la[;k&2@vihykaV chek dEiuh dh vksj ls lafLFkr vihy la[;k&2283@2010 esa fy;s x;s vk{ksi ekus tkus ;ksX; ugha gSA vr% ukWu&DysesaV la[;k&2@vihykaV chek dEiuh dh vksj ls izLrqr vihy cyghu o lkjghu gksus ds dkj.k vLohdkj dj [kkfjt dh tkrh gSA

¶44

15rnuqlkj ;g vihy fuLrkfjr dh tkrh gSA

¶45

16vkns'k dh izfr ds lkFk izdj.k dk vfHkys[k lacaf/kr vf/kdj.k dks ykSVk;k tkosA

(6 of 6)

[2023:RJ-JP:33109]

[CMA-2283/2010]

17lHkh yfEcr izkFkZuk&i=ksa dks Hkh mijksDrkuqlkj fuLrkfjr fd;k tkrk

¶50

gSA

¶51

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶52

ARIB/4

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Pukhraj Jain and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Pukhraj Jain and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Birma Devi and Ors. Vs Manoj Kumar and Ors.

Jumma through Lrs and Others Vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Manbhar @ Bhagoti and Ors. Vs Shakir Hasan and Ors.

Smt Sangeeta and Others Vs Tejpal and Others

Ramswaroop Sharma Vs Abdul Wahid and Ors.

Radha Bai and Ors. Vs Raghunath and Ors.