Remanded

Santosh @ Santok v. Ladu Lal

Rajasthan HC24 Jan 2024CMA/347/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the Motor Accident Tribunal's award which wrongly excluded the wife and daughter as claimants and incorrectly deducted income for personal expenses. The appeal was disposed of by remanding the matter to the Tribunal for fresh orders on apportionment of a settled enhanced compensation amount.

What did the court decide?

The order was remanded to the Motor Accident Tribunal for passing fresh orders on apportionment of the enhanced settlement amount of Rs. 6,80,000/- among the six eligible claimants.

Santosh @ Santok Vs Ladu Lal — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:4324]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 347/2021

¶4

Smt. Santosh @ Santok W/o Shivprakash @ Shivlal, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Dhakadkhedi, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶5

Miss Manisha D/o Shivprakash @ Shivlal, Aged About 1 Years, minor through their natural guardian mother Smt. Santosh @ Santok R/o Dhakadkhedi, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶6

----Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

Ladu Lal S/o Nanda Gurjar, R/o Balaji Chowk, Motron Ka Kheda, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶9

Rameshwar S/o Lalu Gurjar, R/o Kali Khol, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶10

Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd, Office Icici Lombard House, 414, Veer Sawarkar Marg, Near Sidhi Vinayak Temple, Prabha Devi, Mumbai

¶11

Shambhu Lal S/o Nanda Dhakad, R/o Dhakadkhedi, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶12

Smt. Harku Devi W/o Shambhu Lal Dhakad, R/o Dhakadkhedi, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶13

Ganesh S/o Shambhu Lal Dhakad, R/o Dhakadkhedi, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶14

Smt. Meera D/o Shambhu Lal W/o Raju Dhakad, R/o Dhakadkhedi, Tehsil Mandalgarh, Dis. Bhilwara

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Sandeep Saruparia with
	Mr. Nikhil Ajmera
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Jagdish Vyas

¶17

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶18

Order

¶19

24/01/2024

¶20

The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment/award dated 31.10.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2, Bhilwara in Motor Accident Claim Case No.321/2018 (665/2016) whereby an amount of Rs.8,55,128/-

[2024:RJ-JD:4324]

[CMA-347/2021]

(2 of 4)

with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the application, has been awarded in favour of claimants No.2 to 4 in equal share.

¶25

The present appeal has been preferred by claimants No.5 and 6, being the wife and daughter of the deceased. 3. The judgment impugned has been challenged on the following grounds:

¶26

Firstly, the award has been passed wrongly in favour of claimants No.2 to 4, i.e., the mother, brother and sister of the deceased only; secondly, a deduction of 1/2 (half) of the income has been made by the learned Tribunal with a finding that the deceased was unmarried which is erroneous on the face of it; thirdly, the award does not specify as to how the compensation amount would be distributed among the claimants; fourthly, although no direction regarding fixed deposits has been passed but it has been observed by the learned Tribunal that no loan would be permissible on the fixed deposits without the permission of the Tribunal.

¶27

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that a bare perusal of the impugned award makes it clear that the same is just a copy paste award as the Tribunal has not even applied its mind while passing the same. 5. However, learned counsel for the appellants claimants as well as learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that a compromise/settlement has been entered into between the parties and in terms of the settlement, the Insurance Company is agreeable to pay an enhanced amount of Rs.6,80,000/- to the claimants as a full and final settlement. A

[2024:RJ-JD:4324]

[CMA-347/2021]

(3 of 4)

memorandum of understanding has also been submitted by both the learned counsels, which is taken on record.

¶32

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that although a compromise has been entered into between the parties, as no directions regarding the disbursal/apportionment of the compensation amount has been passed by the learned Tribunal, the matter deserves to be remanded to the learned Tribunal for the purposes of passing appropriate orders for apportionment as well as disbursal of the award amount to the claimants. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment/award. 8. A bare perusal of the cause title makes it clear that there were six claimants in the present matter being the father, mother, brother, sister, wife and daughter of the deceased, therefore, finding of the learned Tribunal regarding the deceased being unmarried, is prima facie incorrect and hence, is set aside. As a consequence, the deduction of 1/2 (half) of income qua the personal expenses being erroneous is also set aside. Further, the award to the extent of having allowed in favour of claimants No.2 to 4 only, also being erroneous is hereby set aside.

¶33

As an agreement of settlement has already been arrived into between the parties qua the quantum of compensation, in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is remanded back to the learned Tribunal for the limited purpose of passing fresh orders for apportionment of the award amount already deposited and the further enhanced amount of Rs.6,80,000/- to the eligible/entitled claimants in terms of law.

[2024:RJ-JD:4324]

[CMA-347/2021]

(4 of 4)

The enhanced amount as agreed between the parties be deposited with the learned Tribunal within a period of four weeks from now.

¶38

The parties shall appear before the learned Tribunal on 05.02.2024.

¶39

It is made clear that if claimants No.1 to 4 do not appear before the Tribunal on the said date, notices be issued to them and final orders be passed only after hearing them.

¶40

As the record had been summoned by this Court, if the same has been received, the same be returned back to the learned Tribunal forthwith.

¶41

The appeal stands disposed of.

¶42

The pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶43

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶44

139-Sachin/-

Santosh @ Santok v. Ladu Lal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh @ Santok v. Ladu Lal

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

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs Rameshchandra Shrimali

Janakba Ugamsinh Sodha Vs All Citizen of India

Hem Kanwar Vs Hema Ram

Lrs of Ramchandra Mali Vs Asu Lal Sha Ram and Anr.

Smt.Meera Kanwar and Ors. Vs Himmat Singh and Anr.

Mithu Singh Vs Smt.Meena Kunwar and Ors.