Allowed

Ramwati Wife of Late Shri Ramcharan, v. Sapat Kha Son of Roopa Kha

Rajasthan HC20 Oct 2023CMA/840/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal against the High Court of Rajasthan, Justice Shubha Mehta acknowledged that the High Court had enhanced compensation amounts for loss of dependency and conventional heads based on relevant Supreme Court precedents and ruled that the appellate court should examine the enhanced claim for damages against the Insurance Company.

What did the court decide?

Compensation against the respondent Insurance Company enhanced to Rs. 11,63,032/-.

Ramwati Wife of Late Shri Ramcharan, Vs Sapat Kha… — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 840/2023

¶3

Ramwati Wife Of Late Shri Ramcharan, Aged About 48 Years, Resident Of Village Pahadi, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar.

¶4

Manveer Singh @ Mahaveer Son Ramcharan, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Village Pahadi, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar.

¶5

Harveer Son Of Late Shri Ramcharan, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Village Pahadi, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar.

¶6

Balveer Son Of Late Shri Ramcharan, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Village Pahadi, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar.

¶7

Rajveer Son Of Late Shri Ramcharan, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Village Pahadi, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar.

¶8

Smt. Phoolan Devi Wife Of Late Shri Harchand@ Harchandi, Resident Of Village Pahadi, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar.

¶9

----Appellants

¶10

Versus

¶11

Sapat Kha Son Of Roopa Kha, Resdient Of Ranikheda, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar(Driver Vehicle Motorcycle Hero Hf Deluxe Reg. No. Rj 40-Sa-6831).

¶12

Islam Son Of Shri Ramjan, Resident Of Milakpuri, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar(Owner Vehicle Motorcycle Hero Hf Deluxe Reg. No. Rj40-Sa-6831).

¶13

Hakamdeen Son Of Shri Gulmohammad, Resident Of Village Sahdoli, Police Station Mia Alwar(Power Of Attorney Holder Vehicle Motorcycle Hero Hf Deluxe Reg. No. Rj 40-Sa-6831).

¶14

National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office 61, Aerodrum Road, Alwar Through Branch Manager, Vehicle Insurance Company Vehicle Motorcycle Hero Hf Deluxe Reg. No. Rj 40-Sa-6831(Period Of Insurance 11-01-2014 To 10-01-2015).

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

	(2 of 7)	[CMA-840/2023]
For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Ramsharan Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. R B Bansal

¶17

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA

¶18

Order

¶19

20/10/2023

¶20

vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj dh vksj ls ;g vihy fo}ku eksVj nq?kZVuk nkok vf/kdj.k] vyoj ¼ftls vkxs vf/kdj.k ls lEcksf/kr fd;k tk,xk½ }kjk eksVj nq?kZVuk nkok la[;k& 563@2015 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; ,oa vokMZ fnukad 11-01-2023 ] ftlds ek/;e ls vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj ds i{k esa dqy {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 8]43]976@ &: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

¶21

la{ksi esa izdj.k dh rF;kRed fLFkfr ds vuqlkj fnukad 05-10-2014 dks djhc lka; 5 cts erd jkepj.k o mldk iq= cM+kSnkdku ls eksVjlkbZfdy ls okfil vius xkao igkM+h tk jgs Fks] rks lkeus ls eksVjlkbZfdy la[;k vkjts40 ,l, 6831 dks mldk pkyd rstxfr o ykijokgh ls pykdj yk;k vkSj erd dh eksVjlkbZfdy esa VDdj ekjh] ftlls mldh eR;q gksus ij vihykFkhZx.k 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 ds }kjk nksuksa i{kksa ds rdZ lqudj i=koyh ij miyC/k ekSf[kd ,oa nLrkosth lk{; ds vk/kkj ij vkyksP; fu.kZ; }kjk vihykFkhZx.k dks {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 8]43]976@& :i;s e; C;kt fnykbZ xbZ] ftlesa of) fd;s tkus gsrq vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj dh vksj ls ;g vihy izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

¶22

cgl lquh xbZA fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZx.k dk rdZ gS fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k us e`rd dks vdq'ky Jfed ekudj rRle; dh U;wure etnwjh nj 189 :i;s izfrfnu ds vuqlkj 26 fnu dh U;wure etnwjh dqy 4]914 :i;s dks mldh ekfld vk; ekuk gS] tcfd ,d ekg esa 30 dk;Z fnol ekurs gq, 189 :i;s

¶23

(3 of 7) [CMA-840/2023]

¶24

izfrfnu ds vuqlkj e`rd dh ekfld vk; dqy 5]670 :i;s ekuh tkdj vk; dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ dh x.kuk dh tkuh pkfg,A

¶25

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k us erd dh iRuh dks izse] Lusg dh oapuk dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i 40]000 :i;s fnyok;s gSa] tcfd erd dh larkus] ekrk rFkk thoulkFkh izR;sd mldh e`R;q ls gqbZ Lusg] izse o lkgp;Z dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i 40]000 :Ik;s izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSaA

¶26

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

¶27

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶28

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

¶29

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanuram @ Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130

¶30

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

¶31

blds foijhr chek dEiuh ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk rdZ gS fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk tks ekfld vk; fu/kkZfjr djrs gq, vihykFkhZx.k dks {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnykbZ xbZ gS] og mfpr gS] ftlesa fdlh izdkj ds dksbZ gLr{ksi dh dksbZ vko';drk ugha gSA mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd U;kf;d fofu'p; National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680 esa dsoy iRuh dks gh vius thoulkFkh dh laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z (Spousal Consortium) dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i 40]000@& :i;s fnyk, x, gSaA blh izdkj dk fl)kUr ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds U;kf;d fofu'p; Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Bhagat Singh Rawat & Ors. SLP(C) Nos. 1185-1186/2021 esa Hkh izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gSA vr% mDr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa ds izdk'k esa dsoy iRuh dks gh ;g jkf'k fnykbZ tk ldrh gS] vU; dks ughaA fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk tks {kfriwfrZ

¶32

(4 of 7) [CMA-840/2023]

¶33

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 vr% vihy fujLruh; gksus ls fujLr dh tkosA nksuksa 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

¶34

vk; dh {kfr (Loss of Income)

¶35

izdj.k esa iz'uxr nq?kZVuk fnukad 05-10-2014 dks gksuk Lohdr rF; gSA fo}ku vf/kdj.k us erd dks vdq'ky Jfed ekurs gq, rr~le; izHkkoh U;wure etnwjh nj 189 :i;s izfrfnu ds vuqlkj 26 fnu dh U;wure etnwjh dqy 4]914 :i;s dks mldh ekfld vk; ekuk gS] tcfd ;g lqLFkkfir fl)kUr gS fd vk; dh x.kuk ds fy, ,d ekg esa 30 dk;Z fnol dh etnwjh dh x.kuk dh tkuh pkfg,A ,slh fLFkfr esa Je foHkkx dh vf/klwpuk ds vuqlkj vdq'ky Jfed dh U;wure etnwjh 189 :i;s izfrfnu ekurs gq, ,d ekg esa 30 dk;Z fnol ds fy, erd dh vk; dh {kfr ds fu/kkZj.k gsrq mldh ekfld vk; 189 x 30= 5]670 :i;s ekuk tkuk ;qfDr;qDr ,oa U;k;laxr gSA bl izdkj erd dh okf"kZd vk; 5670 x 12= 68,040/- :i;s ekuh tkrh gSA

¶36

fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk U;kf;d fofuf'p; National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. esa izfrikfnr fl)kUrksa ds vuqlkj erd dh vk;q o mlds dk;Z dh izdfr dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, mldh Hkfo"; esa vk; dh of) dh izR;k'kk ds fy;s mldh vk; esa 25 izfr'kr of) dh gS] ftl ij nksuksa i{kksa dh vksj ls dksbZ vkifRr ugha dh xbZ gSA

¶37

fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk e`rd ij N% O;fDr vkfJr gksuk ekurs gq, mlds Lo;a ij gksus okys [kpZ ds :i esa vk; ds 1@4 Hkkx dh dVkSrh dh xbZ gS] ftlds laca/k esa fdlh Hkh i{k dh dksbZ vkifRr ugha gSA

¶38

fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk {kfriwfrZ jkf'k dh x.kuk ds dze esa e`rd dh vk;q 44 o"kZ ekudj 14 dk xq.kd iz;qDr fd;k x;k gS] tks fcUnw Hkh fufoZokfnr gSA

¶39

vr% vk; dh {kfr dh en esa fuEukuqlkj {kfriwfrZ jkf'k dk fu/kkZj.k fd;k tkrk gS %&

¶40

(5 of 7)

¶41

[CMA-840/2023]

¶42

Ø-laen {kfriwfrZ jkf'k

¶43

1- erd dh okf"kZd vk; 68,040/2Hkfo"; esa gksusokyh vk; dh of) dh 17,010/- (25% of the income) izR;k'kk

¶44

3- ;ksx 85,050/4e`rd }kjk Lo;a ij fd;s tkus okys [kpZ 21,262/- (1/4 of 85,050) dh dVkSrh

¶45

5- mDr dVkSrh ds i'pkr 'ks"k jkf'k 85,050-21,262=63,788/¼vihykFkhZx.k dh okf"kZd fuHkZjrk½

¶46

6- e`rd dh vk;q ds vk/kkj ij iz;ksT; xq.kd 14

¶47

7- vk; dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 63,788x14= 8,93,032/-

¶48

vr% fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk vk; dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i fnykbZ xbZ jkf'k 7]73]976@& :i;s esa 1]19]056@& :i;s dh o`f) djrs gq, bl U;k;ky; }kjk vk; dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i jkf'k 8]93]032@& :i;s fnyk;k tkuk mfpr gSA

¶49

ikjEifjd en (Conventional heads)

¶50

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

¶51

fo}ku vf/koDrk chek dEiuh }kjk U;kf;d fofu'p; Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Bhagat Singh Rawat & Ors. SLP(C) Nos. 1185-1186/2021 esa dsoy iRuh dks thoulkFkh dh laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i 40]000@&:i;s dh jkf'k fnyk, tkus dk rdZ fn;k x;k gS] ijUrq ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us U;kf;d fofu'p; United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder (2020) Supreme Court (SC) 425 ¼tks rhu lnL;h; ihB }kjk ikfjr fd;k x;k gS½ esa e`rd dh larkus] thoulkFkh o ekrk&firk dks laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ gsrq 40]000@&:i;s dh jkf'k fnyok;s tkus dk fl)kUr izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa chek dEiuh dks muds }kjk izLrqr U;kf;d fofu'p; ls dksbZ ykHk izkIr ugha gksrk gSA

¶52

[CMA-840/2023]

¶53

(6 of 7)

¶54

orZeku izdj.k esa fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk vafre laLdkj (Funeral) dh en esa 15]000@& :i;s] lEifRr dh gkfu (Loss of estate) ds fy;s 15]000@& :i;s rFkk vihykFkhZ dze&1 ¼erd dh iRuh½ dks erd dh laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i 40]000@& :i;s] bl izdkj dqy 70]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k fnykbZ xbZ gS] tcfd mi;qZDr U;kf;d fofuf'p;ksa dh jks'kuh esa vihykFkhZ dze&2 ls 6 Hkh ¼erd dh larkus o ekrk½ erd dh laxfr] Lusg ,oa lkgp;Z dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ Lo:i 40]000@& :i;s izR;sd vFkkZr~ 40,000x5=2,00,000 :i;s izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSaA

¶55

vr% fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk bl en esa fnykbZ xbZ 70]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k esa 2]00]000@& :i;s dh o`f) djrs gq, bl U;k;ky; }kjk 2]70]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k fnyk;k tkuk mfpr gSA

¶56

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 gS&

¶57

Ø-la-	en	{kfriwfrZ jkf'k
1-	vk; dh {kfr dh {kfriwfrZ jkf'k	8,93,032/-
2-	ikjEifjd en dh jkf'k	2,70,000/-
3-	dqy {kfriwfrZ jkf'k	11,63,032/-

¶58

ifj.kker% fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk vihykFkhZx.k&nkosnkj dks fnykbZ xbZ {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 8]43]976@& :i;s esa mi;qZDrkuqlkj 3]19]056@& :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 11]63]032@& :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

¶59

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

¶60

[CMA-840/2023]

¶61

(7 of 7)

¶62

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

¶63

(SHUBHA MEHTA),J

¶64

VISHAL SHARMA /285

Ramwati Wife of Late Shri Ramcharan, v. Sapat Kha Son of Roopa Kha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramwati Wife of Late Shri Ramcharan, v. Sapat Kha Son of Roopa Kha

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

R S R T C Jaipur Vs Smt Rukma and Ors.

Smt. Geeta Devi W/O Sohanlal Verma Vs Shriram S/O Ratanlal Soni

Smt Suva Devi W/O Late Shri Heera Lal Vs Bhawani Singh S/O Shri Ladu Singh

Smt Sunita Devi Vs Hansraj and Ors.

Smt Bhudei W/O Maharaj Singh Vs General Manager, Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Corporation

Smt. Rajwati W/O Shivsingh Vs Ajeet Kumar S/O Rajendra Singh