1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. JUDGMENT (Prakash Saini & Anr. Vs. Jogindra Singh and Ors.) S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.324/2004 DATE OF JUDGMENT ::: 9tH NOVEMBER, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. MS Parmar, for the appellants. Mr. Ishwar Jain, for the respondent No.2. Mr. Budhi Prakash Sharma,for respondent No.3. BY THE COURT: Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and award dated 12.11.2003 rendered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kotputli District Jaipur, whereby the learned Tribunal decreed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the appellants-claimants and against the respondents. Dissatisfied with the amount under the award, the appellants have preferred this appeal for the enhancement of the quantum of compensation. 2. The nub of the appellants' story is that on 5th October, 2000 at about 10.00 AM Kumari Manju was standing near Tejpal's Hotel on Kachcha Footpath, meantime one Bus No.HR-46A-0553 plying towards Jaipur, driven by its driver rashly and negligently at a fast speed, suddenly emerged on the wrong side and 2 hit Ms. Manju, resulting into her death on the spot. An FIR of this accident came be to be registered in the Police Station Kotputli, wherein the police after completion of investigation filed the police report and sent the bus driver to trial. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants as also the counsel for respondent No.3 Insurance Co. and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned award. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants has canvassed that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is quite meagre and in view of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manju Devi & Anr. Vs. Musafir Paswan & Anr. 2005(1) TAC 609 (SC), the learned Tribunal should have considered Rs.15,000/- per annum to be the notional income of the deceased and after applying the multiplier as proposed in the IInd Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, the amount of compensation should have been computed, but the learned Tribunal erroneously awarded a lump-sum amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the appellants, which is neither based on sound and cogent reasoning nor is it in accordance with the provisions of law, hence, the amount of compensation needs 3 to be enhanced and thus, the award may be modified. 5. Learned counsel for the Insurance Co. has defended the impugned award and contended that the amount so awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper, which warrants no interference. 6. In the case of Manju and Anr. VS. Musafir Paswan & Anr., 2005(1) TAC 609 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that when the deceased was non-earning member then as per the IInd schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act the notional income of Rs.15,000/- per annum should be taken into consideration for computing the amount of compensation. In this case a boy died in an accident whose age was 13 years. The Hon'ble Apex Court considered the notional income to be the income of the deceased and after applying the multiplier as proposed in IInd Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, computed the said amount. 7. Now, adverting to the facts of the instant case, it is noticed that the case of the appellants is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court pronounced in the case of Manju Devi (Supra). The deceased Manju at the time of death was 12 years old. Whether the deceased is a boy or a girl and if the age of the victim is up to 15 years, the 4 multiplier of 15 is required to be applied. There cannot be any deviation from the law as promulgated by the legislature. The legislature has not created any distinction between the death of the boy and death of a major or the death of an old man for the purpose of computing the amount of compensation. The learned Tribunal is required to follow the law in letter and spirit as proposed in the IInd Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act. Since the deceased Ms. Manju had no income prior to accident, hence for the purpose of compensation, notional income of Rs.15,000/- per annum is required to be taken into consideration and after applying the multiplier of 15 as proposed in the IInd Schedule, amount of compensation comes as under: Rs.15,000 X 15 = Rs.2,25,000/- 8. Thus, the amount of compensation under the head of loss of economic dependency of the family in this matter comes to Rs.2,25,000/-. The learned Tribunal under this head has merely awarded Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence the amount of compensation deserves to be enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.2,25,000/-. 9. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is allowed and the amount of compensation is enhanced from 5 Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.2,25,000/-. The rest of the terms under the award shall remain unchanged. The appellants-claimants shall be entitled to get interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount also from the date of filing of the claim petition, till the amount is realised. 10. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with the learned Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today, which shall be disbursed to the claimants-appellants by the Tribunal in accordance with the terms and conditions under the award. The impugned award stands modified accordingly. 11. There shall be no order as to costs. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. PCG 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. (Prakash Saini & Anr.Vs.Jogindra Singh and Ors.) S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.324/2004 DATE OF JUDGMENT ::: 9tH NOVEMBER, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. MS Parmar, for the appellants. Mr. Ishwar Jain, for the respondent No.2. Mr. Budhi Prakash Sharma for respondent No.3. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is allowed and the amount of compensation is enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.2,25,000/-. The rest of the terms under the award shall remain unchanged. The appellants-claimants shall be entitled to get interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount also from the date of filing of the claim petition till the amount is realised. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with the learned Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today which shall be disbursed by the Tribunal in accordance with the terms and conditions under the award. The impugned award stands modified accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.(See separate judgment). (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. pcg