Partly allowed

Smt. Nazma and Ors. v. Naval Kishore Sharma and Ors.

Rajasthan HC6 Feb 2024CMA/1678/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appellants' appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The Court enhanced the compensation by applying a 25% future prospect addition, changing personal expense deduction from 1/3rd to 1/4th, and revising conventional head amounts per Apex Court ratios, ordering the insurance company to deposit the enhanced sum.

What did the court decide?

The compensation was enhanced to Rs. 7,26,000/- total. The respondent insurance company is directed to deposit this amount within two months.

Smt. Nazma and Ors. Vs Naval Kishore Sharma and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:6604]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1678/2004

Smt. Nazma And Ors

----Appellant

Versus

Naval Kishore Sharma And Ors

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Mudit Vaishnav.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. T.R.S. Sodha.

¶10

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶11

Judgment

¶12

06/02/2024

¶13

The present misc. appeal has been filed by the appellantsclaimants seeking enhancement of the compensation amount awarded vide Judgment & Award dated 28.04.2004 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal First, Jodhpur in MAC Case No.555/1999.

¶14

The Learned Tribunal vide the impugned judgment/award dated 28.04.2004 awarded a sum of Rs. 3,28,800/- as compensation alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 15.12.1999.

¶15

Brief facts of the case are that a claim petition was filed by the claimants with the submission that on 06.03.1998, deceased Salimudin was travelling in the bus bearing registration no.DL-1P5998 driven by respondent no.1 Naval Kishore Sharma. It was submitted that as the bus was driven rashly and negligently by its driver, the same went out of control and as a result thereof, the

(2 of 6)

[2024:RJ-JD:6604]

[CMA-1678/2004]

bus overturned towards left. The deceased, who was sitting near the left side window, hence, was crushed under the bus and died on the spot. The offending vehicle, on the date of accident, was owned by respondent no.2 and insured with respondent no.3– Insurance Company.

¶20

The appellants-claimants are wife, sons, father, and mother of the deceased Salimudin. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.29,00,000/-. However, the learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence available on the record and after hearing the counsel for the parties awarded total compensation of Rs.3,28,800/- in favour of the claimantsappellants, the break-up of which is as under:

¶21

1.	Income per month {after deduction towards personal and living expenses(1/3^rd) in the monthly income of Rs. 2000/-}	Rs. 1400/-
2.	Loss of Annual Income(as per the age of 40 years of the deceased, multiplier of 16).	1400 x 12 x 16 = Rs. 2,68,800/-
3.	Mental and physical agony to wife (claimant no. 1)	Rs. 10,000/-
4.	Love and affection	Rs. 5,000/- each to children and to parents ( 5000 x 6 =30,000)
5.	Transportation charges	Rs. 5,000/-
6.	Under the head of ‘Funeral expenses’	Rs. 10,000/-
7.	Total amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal	Rs. 3,28,800/-

¶22

Learned Tribunal also awarded interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition

¶23

Averring the compensation to be meagre, the claimants-

¶24

appellants have preferred the present appeal.

(3 of 6)

[2024:RJ-JD:6604]

[CMA-1678/2004]

Learned counsel for the appellants raised the following grounds:

¶29

(I) Learned Tribunal erred in not considering the future prospects while computing the loss of income. (II) The deduction of 1/3^rd qua personal expenses as made by the learned Tribunal is erroneous as the same ought to have been 1/4^th keeping into consideration the number of dependents.

¶30

(III) No amount qua the head of ‘loss of estate’ has been awarded and meagre amount qua ‘funeral expenses’ has been awarded by the learned Tribunal.

¶31

(IV) The amount qua the head of consortium has also wrongly been granted only for an amount of Rs.5000/- each to the claimants except claimant no.1 (wife).

¶32

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company submitted that the judgment/award passed by the learned Tribunal is totally in consonance with law and no ground for enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is made out.

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶34

On the ground that the learned Tribunal erred in not computing the future prospects in the loss of income, this Court is of the opinion that an addition of 25%, as the age of deceased was 40 years at the time of accident, ought to be made in the income in terms of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Limited Vs.

(4 of 6)

[2024:RJ-JD:6604]

[CMA-1678/2004]

Pranay Sethi & Ors.; (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Sarla Verma &

¶39

Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr; 2009 (6) SCC 121.

¶40

Coming on the ground of deduction of 1/3^rd as made by the learned Tribunal, this Court is of the opinion that the same ought to have been 1/4^th as in the present case, there are 6 dependants [father of the deceased being an earning member, cannot be said to be a ‘dependant’]. 10. So far as the ground of the amount payable under the conventional heads is concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) has fixed the amount payable under the conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses to be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively. Further, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram and Ors.; (2018) 18 SCC 130 interpreted ‘consortium’ to be a compendious term, which encompasses spousal consortium, parental consortium as well as filial consortium. Meaning thereby, the learned Tribunal erred in awarding an amount of Rs.5,000/each to the claimants and none to claimant no.1 (wife) under the head of ‘loss of consortium’ as, as per the above ratio, ‘loss of consortium’ ought to be granted to each claimant.

¶41

Further the amount under the head of loss of consortium deserves to be enhanced at the rate of 10% every three years from the date of judgment of Pranay Sethi (supra) i.e. 2017 and therefore the amount under the head ‘loss of consortium’ deserves to be enhanced to Rs.48,000/- (after increase of 20%).

(5 of 6)

[2024:RJ-JD:6604]

[CMA-1678/2004]

In view of the above analysis, the amount under the ‘conventional heads’ deserves to be modified as under:

¶46

Loss of estate: Rs.15,000/- ;

¶47

Loss of consortium: Rs.48,000/ - to each claimant;

¶48

Funeral expenses: Rs.15,000/- .

¶49

Consequently, the present appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment/award dated 28.04.2004 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal First, Jodhpur in MAC Case No.555/1999 is modified to the extent that the claimants shall be

¶50

entitled to the following compensation :

¶51

1.	Income per month (after adding future prospects (25%) and deduction towards personal and living expenses (1/4^thin the monthly income of Rs. 2000/-)	Rs. 1875/-
2.	Loss of Annual Income (multiplier of 16 as considered by the Tribunal).	1875 x 12 x 16 = Rs.3,60,000 /-
3.	Under the head of ‘loss of estate’	Rs. 15000/-
4.	Under the head of ‘consortium’	Rs. 48000/- each to appellant Nos.1,2,3,4,5, 6& 7 Total: Rs. 3,36,000 /-
5.	Under the head of ‘Funeral expenses’	Rs. 15000/-
6.	Total amount of compensation	Rs. 7,26,000/-
7.	Amount awarded by Tribunal.	Rs. 3,28,800/-
8.	Enhanced amount of compensation	Rs. 7,26,000 /- - Rs.3,28,800 /- ------------------ Rs. 3,97,200/-

¶52

The enhanced amount qua the loss of income and other heads shall carry an interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. However, the amount

(6 of 6)

[2024:RJ-JD:6604]

[CMA-1678/2004]

awarded vide this order qua the head of consortium shall not carry any interest as the same already comprises of a 10% increase for every three years and hence, has been computed to be Rs.48,000/-.

¶57

The respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with the Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which, the same shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of this order till actual realization. Upon deposition, learned Tribunal is directed to disburse the same to the claimants in terms of the award.

¶58

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶59

381-SPhophaliya/-

Smt. Nazma and Ors. v. Naval Kishore Sharma and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nazma and Ors. v. Naval Kishore Sharma 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

General Manager Vs Maili @ Mahilee

Devendra Vs Prem Shankar

Mayli @ Mahili Vs Prem Shankar

Aiji Devi Vs Rajesh Kumar

Pradeep Kumar Vs Shanti

Champa Kanwar and Anr. Vs Heera Lal and Ors.