1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. (1)S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 2059/2000 (Smt. Batto Devi Vs. Shri Pafal Ram & ors.) (2)SB CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 2064/2009 (Rajasthan State Road Transport Vs. Batto Devi & anr) Date of order :::: 20/08/2009 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Mr. K.N. Tiwari, for the claimant-Smt. Batto Devi Mr. Aladin Khan, for the respondent-RSRTC in CMA 2059/2000 Mr. Virendra Lodha, for appellant-RSRTC in CMA No.2064/2000 Since both the aforesaid appeals have arisen out of common award dated 23/09/2000, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur, the same are being decided by this common order. The appeal, bearing SB Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2059/2000, Smt. Batto Devi Vs. Shri Pafal Ram and anr has been filed for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal and the appeal, bearing SB Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2064/2000, Rajasthan State Road Transportation Vs. Batto Devi and anr. has been filed by the appellant corporation challenging the award of the learned Tribunal praying for scaling down the compensation awarded. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur vide judgment dated 23/09/2000 awarded a total amount of Rs. 6,10,000/- for 100% disability caused on account of injury sustained by the injured appellant on her backbone which has resulted in crippling and thereby confining her to bed. 2 Learned counsel for the injured appellant submits that the injured appellant is a lady of 40 years and ever since her accident she is bedridden on account of injury on her backbone. Learned counsel further submits that the injured appellant is not in a position to carry on the routine activities of her daily life and she has to keep a servant round the clock to assist her. Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,10,000/- only while the lady has to suffer for whole of life and her social life has been curtailed. Learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal has assessed Rs. 2,000/- as monthly income and has assessed Rs. 1000/- for expenditure of the servant to be engaged and hence the compensation has been computed at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month. Learned counsel submits that the amount so assessed is on lower side and, as such, income of Rs. 3,000/- per month in stead of Rs. 2,000/- per month deserves to be assessed. That apart, she deserves to be adequately compensated for the pains and agony. Per contra, learned counsel for the RSRTC submitted that the Tribunal has already awarded excessive compensation and the same deserves to be scaled down. It has been further submitted that the injured appellant is stated to be mainly a labourer and as per the minimum wages for unskilled labour, the income deserves to be scaled down. On hearing rival submissions and going through the record as well as award of the case, it is revealed that the Tribunal has reasonably assessed the 3 income of the injured to be Rs. 2,000/- and has also reasonably assessed the expenditures of Rs. 1,000/- per month for a servant so as to assist her. The injured has sustained 100% disability and is stated to be confined to bed and on account of her injury her social life is completely curtailed and she is stated to be not in a position to move about and has to depend on others for her daily routine activities. Thus, a lump sum amount of Rs. 60,000/- deserves to be additionally awarded for her physical and mental pain and curtailment of her social life. Accordingly, the SB Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2064/2000 filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation for scaling down the compensation is dismissed as devoid of merit while the SB Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2059/2000 filed by the injured claimant Smt. Batto, is partly allowed and the total amount of award passed by the Tribunal is enhanced by Rs. 60,000/- and the additional enhanced compensation which would carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the appeal i.e. 27/11/2000 to be paid within a period of three months. Thereafter, interest shall be paid at the rate of 9% per annum. Rest of the terms of the award shall remain unchanged. Record of the trial court be sent back forthwith. (Guman Singh), J. Raghu