Allowed

Kanhaiyalal S/O Shri Sultan v. Vikas S/O Shri Dharamveer Yadav

Rajasthan HC10 Oct 2023CMA/5258/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court enhanced the compensation awarded under a motor accident claim by including damages for the deceased husband's loss of consortium, overturning the Convocational Bench's view to grant approximately eighty thousand rupees in addition to the total awarded loss of consortium.

What did the court decide?

Compensation for loss of consortium granted to the husband enhanced by 80,000 rupees.

Kanhaiyalal S/O Shri Sultan Vs Vikas S/O Shri Dharamveer Yadav — Insurance | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5258/2019

¶3

Kanhaiyalal S/o Shri Sultan, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Chaturbhuj, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj)

¶4

Smt. Dhuni Devi W/o Shri Kanhaiyalal, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Chaturbhuj, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj)

¶5

----Appellants

¶6

Versus

¶7

Vikas S/o Shri Dharamveer Yadav, R/o Ramgarh Thana Paniyala, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj) (Driver Vehicle Car No. Rj-32C.a.-3359)

¶8

Rohitash S/o Shri Laxman Yadav, R/o Bakhrana, Tehsil Kotputli District Jaipur (Raj) (Owner Vehicle Car No. Rj32C.a.-3359)

¶9

The New India Insurance Company Limited Through Regional Manager, Regional Office Nehru Palace Tonk Road, Jaipur Raj. Insurance Company Vehicle Car No. Rj32C.a.-3359, Effective Date 07.03.2015 To 06.03.2016

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s) For Respondent(s)

¶12

: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Bhargava : Mr. Ram Singh Rathore

¶13

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA

¶14

Order

¶15

10/10/2023

¶16

vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj dh vksj ls ;g vihy fo}ku U;k;k/kh'k eksVj nq?kZVuk okn U;k;kf/kdj.k] Øe&2 dksViwryh ftyk t;iqj ¼ftls vkxs vf/kdj.k ls lEcksf/kr fd;k tk,xk½ }kjk izdj.k la[;k& 222@2018 ¼243@2015½ esa ikfjr fu.kZ; ,oa vokMZ fnukad 27-06-2019 ] ftlds ek/;e ls vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj ds i{k esa dqy {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 9]51]743@& :i;s dk iapkV ikfjr fd;k x;k] ls O;fFkr gksdj ,oa mDr {kfriwfrZ jkf'k esa o`f) fd, tkus ds lEcU/k esa izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

¶17

[CMA-5258/2019]

¶18

(2 of 4)

¶19

la{ksi esa izdj.k dh rF;kRed fLFkfr ds vuqlkj fnukad 26-04-2015 dks /kesZUnz ,oa fnyhi ds eksVjlkbZfdy ls lokj gksdj tkrs gq, ds prqHkqZt iqfyl pkSdh ds ikl ihNs ls dkj ds pkyd }kjk viuk okgu rst o ykijokghiwoZd pykrs gq, VDdj ekjus ds ifj.kkeLo:i mDr O;fDr /kesZUnz dh eR;q gksus ij erd ds vkfJrx.k ¼vihykFkhZx.k½ dh vksj ls fo}ku vf/kdj.k esa Dyse izkFkZuk i= izLrqr dj fofHkUu enksa esa {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnyk, tkus dh izkFkZuk dh xbZA foi{kh dh vksj ls tokc izLrqr fd;k x;kA fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk i{kdkjksa ds vfHkopuksa ds vk/kkj ij fook|d fojfpr fd;s x;sA i{kdkjksa dh lk{; ys[kc) dh xbZA rRi'pkr fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk nksuksa i{kksa ds rdZ lquus ,oa i=koyh ij miyC/k ekSf[kd ,oa nLrkosth lk{; ds vk/kkj ij vkyksP; fu.kZ; }kjk vihykFkhZx.k dks {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 9]51]743@& :i;s e; C;kt fnykbZ xbZ] ftlesa o`f) fd;s tkus gsrq vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj dh vksj ls ;g vihy izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

¶20

cgl lquh xbZA fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZx.k dk rdZ gS fd os dsoy ,d gh vk/kkj ij fo}ku vf/kdj.k ds fu.kZ; dks pqukSrh ns jgs gSa ,oa og ;g gS fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k us laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z dh gkfu (Loss of Consortium) dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i dksbZ jkf'k vihykFkhZx.k dks ugha fnykbZ gS] tcfd izR;sd vkfJr dks 40]000@& :i;s fnyk;s tkus pkfg,A

¶21

mudk rdZ gS fd blds vfrfjDr os fdlh Hkh vU; en esa fnykbZ xbZ {kfriwfrZ jkf'k ,oa vf/kdj.k ds fu.kZ; dks pqukSrh ugha ns jgs gSaA

¶22

fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj us vius mDr rdksZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu U;kf;d fofu'p; izLrqr fd;s ,oa buesa izfrikfnr fl)kUr ds vuqlkj {kfriwfrZ jkf'k c<+k, tkus ,oa izkFkZuk&i= izLrqfr ls C;kt fnyk, tkus dh izkFkZuk dhA

¶23

1- New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Somwati & Ors. (2020) 9 SCC 644

¶24

2- Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanuram & Ors. (2018) 18 SCC 130

¶25

3- United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder (2020) Supreme Court (SC) 425

¶26

izR;FkhZx.k dh vksj ls mDr rdksZa dk fojks/k djrs gq, rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk tks {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnykbZ xbZ gS og i;kZIr ,oa U;k;laxr gS] ftlesa fdlh Hkh izdkj dk gLr{ksi fd, tkus dk dksbZ vk/kkj ugha gSA

¶27

(3 of 4) [CMA-5258/2019]

¶28

vihykFkhZx.k laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i dksbZ jkf'k izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh ugha gSa] vr% vihy fujLruh; gS] fujLr dh tk,A

¶29

mHk; i{kksa ds fo}ku vf/koDrkx.k ds rdksZa ij euu fd;kA vkykSP; fu.kZ; ,oa izLrqr U;kf;d fofuf'p;ksa dk /;kuiwoZd v/;;u fd;k x;kA

¶30

ikjEifjd en (Conventional Heads)

¶31

ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk U;kf;d fofuf'p;ksa United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder (2020) Supreme Court (SC) 425, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Somwati & Ors. (2020) 9 SCC 644 & Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanuram & Ors. (2018) 18 SCC 130 esa ikjEifjd enksa dks ifjHkkf"kr djrs gq, mlesa {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnykbZ xbZ gSA

¶32

orZeku izdj.k esa fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk erd dh laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ ds :i esa vihykFkhZx.k] tks erd ds ekrk&firk gSa] dks dksbZ jkf'k ugha fnyokbZ gS] tks gekjs fopkj ls lgh ugha gS ,oa mDr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa ds izdk'k esa fnyk;k tkuk tkuk mfpr gSA

¶33

vr% mi;qZDr U;kf;d fofuf'p;ksa dh jks'kuh esa e`rd ds ekrk&firk dks vius iq= dh laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z (Filial Consortium) dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ ds :i esa izR;sd dks 40000@& :i;s (40,000x2=80,000) :i;s dqy 80]000@&:i;s dh {kfriwfrZ jkf'k bl en esa fnyk;k tkuk mfpr gSA

¶34

bl izdkj fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj dks fnykbZ xbZ {kfriwfrZ jkf'k esa mi;ZqDrkuqlkj o`f) djrs gq, fuEukuqlkj {kfriwfrZ jkf'k dk fu/kkZj.k fd;k tkrk gSA

¶35

Ø-la-	en	{kfriwfrZ jkf'k
1-	vf/kdj.k }kjk fnykbZ xbZ og jkf'k ftls dksbZ pqukSrh ugha nh xbZ gS	9,51,743/-
2-	ikjEifjd en esa bl U;k;ky; }kjk fnykbZ	80,000/-
	xbZ jkf'k
3-	dqy {kfriwfrZ jkf'k	951743+80000=
		10,31,743/-

¶36

[CMA-5258/2019]

¶37

ifj.kker% fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj dks fnykbZ xbZ {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 9]51]743@& :i;s esa mi;qZDrkuqlkj 80]000@& :i;s dh o`f) djrs gq, djrs gq, bl U;k;ky; }kjk vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj ds i{k esa dqy {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 10]31]743@& :i;s dk iapkV ikfjr fd;k tkrk gSA vihykFkhZx.k }kjk iwoZ esa izkIr dh xbZ jkf'k dqy {kfriwfrZ jkf'k esa lek;ksftr gksxhA

¶38

tgkWa rd C;kt dk iz'u gS] ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds mi;qZDr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa esa izfrikfnr fl)kUrksa dh jks'kuh esa c<+h gqbZ {kfriwfrZ jkf'k ij C;kt nj] C;kt izkIr djus dh frfFk rFkk {kfriwfrZ jkf'k ds vkuqifrd forj.k ds dze esa leLr 'krZsa fo}ku vf/kdj.k ds vkns'kkuqlkj izHkkoh ,oa ;Fkkor jgsaxhA

¶39

mi;qZDrkuqlkj vihy fuLrkfjr dh tkrh gSA rnuqlkj yafcr izkFkZuk i=] ;fn dksbZ gks] fuLrkfjr fd;s tkrs gSaA

¶40

AJAY KUMAR SINGHAL /24

Kanhaiyalal S/O Shri Sultan v. Vikas S/O Shri Dharamveer Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanhaiyalal S/O Shri Sultan v. Vikas S/O Shri Dharamveer Yadav

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

Smt Sushila Devi and Ors. Vs Dal Chand and Ors.

Sumarta Devi W/O Late Lohdya @ Lohdiram Vs Ramjilal S/O Ramsahay

Omprakash S/O Prabhudayal Vs Basant Kumar S/O Banshidhar

Sanjay S/O Ambalal Vs Rakesh S/O Manoharlal

Priyanka Gupta W/O Late Yashpal Gupta Vs Shahbuddin S/O Kayamuddin

Aman Yadav S/O Shri Sitaram Yadav Vs Mahmood S/O Ikramuddin