IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR JUDGMENT Nava & Ors. Versus Vasu Ram & Anr. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.601/1997 Smt. Kesi Versus Vasu Ram & Anr. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 599/1997 Smt. Dhuli & Ors. Versus Vasu Ram & Anr. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 600/1997 Smt. Champa & Ors. Versus Vasu Ram & Anr. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 125/1998 UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 AGAINST THE AWARD PASSED BY LEARNED MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, RAJSAMAND IN CIVIL MISC. (MAC) CASES NO.44/91, 45/91, 46/91, 50/91, 51/91 AND 52/91 DATED 20.06.1997. Date of Judgment : 23.11.2010 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI Mr. Deelip Kawadia ] Mr. Dhanpat Choudhary ] for Mr.BS Rajpurohit}for the appellants Mr. KK Shah for the respondents. BY THE COURT: By the judgment dated 20.06.1997 learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand decided Motor Accident Claims Cases No.44/91, 45/91, 46/91, 50/91, 51/91 and 52/91, out of which Nava & Ors. claimants of claim case No.46/91; Smt. Keshi Page 1 of 11 claimant of Claim Case No.52/91; Smt. Dhuli & Ors. claimants of Claim Case No.45/91 and Smt. Champa & Ors. claimant of Claim Case No.51/1997 preferred these appeals, being aggrieved by the claim cases decided by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand. All the four appeals are being decided by the common judgment as all these claim cases were decided by the learned Tribunal by the common judgment. In Claim Case No.46/91 Nava, Pemli and Khumma were the claimants; in Claim Case No.52/91 Smt. Keshi was the claimant; in Claim Case No.45/91 Smt. Dhuli, Rama, Chandra, Leharia and Nava were the claimants; in Claim Petition No.44/91 Smt. Champa, Kamla; Smt. Lachhu and Behra were claimants. To decide all these appeals it would be proper to narrate the facts of the case in nut-shell. On 16.11.1986, the driver and cleaner of the Truck No. RRY-6434 took some labourers for loading sand from the Banas river, while returning on the way near Haldighat (place Tambudia), the truck was driven by Ghasi in rash and negligent manner. The truck left the road and dashed with huge rock and turned down. Due to this accident, Smt. Keshi, Dhuli, Hemta were seriously injured and Dunga, Takhta and Kishna labourers died on the spot. Page 2 of 11 All the above injured filed separate claim cases and the dependents of the deceased Dunga, Takhta and Kishna filed separate claim petitions. Out of the six cases only four appeals were preferred. I have to deal with the Claim Case No.46/91; 52/91; 45/91 and 44/91. Appeal filed against the Claim Case No.46/1991 bears the Civil Misc. Appeal No.601/1997; appeal filed against the award passed in Claim Case No.52/1991 bears Civil Misc. Appeal No.599/1997; appeal filed against the Claim Case No.45/1991 bears Civil Misc. Appeal No.600/1997 and appeal filed against the award passed in Claim Case No.44/1991 bears Civil Misc. Appeal No.125/1998. All the four appeals have been filed to enhance the quantum of the compensation payable to the injured and dependents. The grounds in the appeal are that the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand while determining the quantum of the compensation on the count of loss of dependency multiply method has been ignored and thus, the learned Tribunal passed the award too low and further the learned Tribunal wrongly blamed the claimants for holding responsible for causing the delay and thus allowing only the lump sum amount as compensation alongwith interest. In all the four claim cases I have to decide only quantum of compensation determined by the learned Tribunal. Page 3 of 11 In the Claim Case No. 44/1991, learned Tribunal awarded Rs.1,26,500/- as compensation and the dependents were Widow, father, mother and son. In the Claim Case No. 45/1991, learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,26,500/- and dependents were widow, son, daughter and father. In the Claim Case No. 46/1991, learned Tribunal awarded Rs.1,11,500/- and the claimants were father, son and daughter as the wife left the deceased before the accident. In the Claim Case No. 52/1991, learned Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- as compensation. Issue No. 2 in each claim petition was regarding the assessment of compensation for which the claimants were entitled. I would like to discuss issue No. 2 of the claim petition of each appeal separately. S.B. C.M.A. No. 601/1997 :- In this case a compensation of Rs.1,11,500/- was awarded by the learned Tribunal for the death of Dunga. The appellants challenged the amount of award on the ground that at the relevant time the age of the deceased was 28 years and Page 4 of 11 even on the basis of the minimum wages of Rs.30/- per day the compensation amount is to be assessed, then it comes to Rs.1,29,600/- because out of Rs.900/-, the dependency amount comes as Rs.600/- and looking to the age of the deceased Dunga being 28 years, if the multiplier of 18 is to be used for assessing the compensation amount, then it comes to Rs.1,29,600/-. Further the award of the learned Tribunal has been challenged on the ground that consolidated interest was awarded by the learned Tribunal which is not proper. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the following judgments in support of his contentions :- (i) 2006 R.A.R. 274 (Raj.) [Mohini Devi (smt.) & Anr. Vs. Hanumansingh & Ors.] (ii) 2003 91) SRJ 580 [Nagappa Vs. Gurudayal Singh & Ors.] (iii) 2004 R.A.R. 24 (Raj.) [Bhoor Singh Vs. Gheesu Lal & Ors.] (iv) 2003 R.A.R. 275 (Raj.) [Udai Lal Vs. Mal Singh & Ors.] (v) 2003 R.A.R. 450 (Raj.) [Soma & Anr. Vs. Man Singh & Ors.] (vi) 2004 R.A.R. 400 (Raj.) [New India Insurance Co. Vs. Smt. Tej Kanwar] The learned Tribunal while awarding the consolidated interest, observed that delay in disposal of claim was caused by claimants themselves. I have perused the original record. There was no delay in producing the evidence. It was due to non-service of notice on owner of the vehicle that claim petition prolonged. I think it not a proper reason to disallow the interest to the claimants. Page 5 of 11 Learned counsel for the respondent while defending the judgment of the learned Tribunal argued that the amount of compensation as assessed by the learned Tribunal is proper and it does not require any interference. In this claim petition, the claimants claimed Rs.1,20,500/- and pleaded the age of the deceased Dunga as 28 years and his monthly income as Rs.600/- per month. In my view, the learned Tribunal has to assess the just compensation and it can be awarded even if the same is more than the amount claimed as the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court held in the case of Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Masi Ram, reported in 1989 ACJ 1120 HP. It is well-settled principle of law that the Tribunal has to determine the fair amount of compensation awardable to the victim of any accident or to the dependents of the deceased, which must be proportionate to the injuries caused and the Tribunal cannot go by ready reckoner. The learned Tribunal awarded consolidated interest to the claimants, whereas the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kaushnuma Begum (Smt.) & Ors. Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Ors. reported in 2001 (2) SCC 9 held that earlier interest was awarded at the rate of 12% per annum, but with the change of the interest rate by the Reserve Bank of India, interest at the rate of 9% per Page 6 of 11 annum is considered to be proper. Therefore, in the present matters, the appellants are entitled to the interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of submission of the claim petition. In the light of the above principle, I have perused the evidence on record and judgment of the learned Tribunal as well as the authorities cited by the learned counsel for the appellant. In this case the learned Tribunal assessed Rs.30/- per day as the income of the deceased and awarded Rs.70,000/- as compensation and Rs.1500/- for funeral and other charges and Rs.25,000/- as the consolidated interest. As per the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the appellant, the consolidated amount as awarded by the learned Tribunal is not proper. Thus, looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, it is proper to enhance the amount of compensation as Rs.1,29,600/- and in addition to it, Rs.1500 as the expenditure for funeral and other charges and Rs.15,000/- for loss of love and affection to the children. Thus, the total compensation comes to Rs.1,46,100/- and the appellants are entitled for interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of submission of the application. S.B. C.M.A. No. 599/1997 :- In this case the learned Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.15,000/- for the injury in the right leg and a fracture of the rib. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that Rs.15,000/- compensation and Rs.5000/- interest is too low for a Page 7 of 11 fracture because the injured was feeling pain even upto the date of the filing of the petition. Learned counsel for the respondents defended the order of the learned Tribunal. Looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not require any interference because no other documentary evidence of any expenditure or any other fact has been adduced by the appellant before the learned Tribunal and only injury report was adduced in the evidence. S.B. C.M.A. No. 600/1997 :- In this case the learned Tribunal awarded Rs.1,26,000/- as compensation including Rs.20,000/- as consolidated interest. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that consolidated interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal was not proper in view of various judgments cited by him and he further argued that the compensation itself is too low, even on the basis of assuming the minimum wages as Rs.30/- per day of a labour. Learned counsel for the respondent defended the judgment of the learned Tribunal. Page 8 of 11 Assuming the minimum wages as Rs.30/- per day in the year 1986 and looking to the age of the deceased being 26 years, I think that the multiplier of 18 should be applied to assess the correct amount of compensation, it comes to Rs.1,29,600/- and further Rs.1500/- for funeral and other charges and Rs.15,000/- for the loss of love and affection would be proper to be awarded, thus, the compensation amount comes to Rs.1,46,100/-. Looking to various judgments cited by the learned counsel for the appellants, the consolidated amount of interest cannot be granted by the learned Tribunal, therefore, I deem it just and proper that the appellant shall be entitled for interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the compensation amount of Rs.1,46,100/- from the date of submission of the application. Accordingly, the award of the learned Tribunal is enhanced. S.B. C.M.A. No. 125/1998 :- In this case the learned Tribunal awarded Rs.1,26,500/- as the total compensation amount including Rs.30,000/- as the consolidated interest. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that consolidated interest awarded by the learned Tribunal was not proper and he cited various judgments in support of his submissions. Learned counsel for the respondents defended the Page 9 of 11 judgment of the learned Tribunal. The claimants in this petition pleaded the age of the deceased Kishna as 20 years and monthly income of the deceased as Rs.750/- per month and on the basis of that pleading, the learned Tribunal awarded the afore-mentioned compensation. There is no evidence on record to show what was the minimum wages at the relevant time, but the learned Tribunal has to assess the just compensation so as to determine the fair amount of compensation awardable to the victim of any accident or to the dependents of the deceased, which must be proportionate to the injuries caused and in such matters the Tribunal cannot go by ready reckoner. At the relevant time the age of the deceased was 20 years and assuming his income as per minimum wages being Rs.30/- per day and applying the multiplier of 18, the amount of compensation comes to Rs.1,29,600/- and further Rs.1500/- is awarded as expenditure of funeral and other charges and Rs.15,000/- for loss of love and affection, thus, the total amount of compensation comes as Rs.1,46,100/-. The appellants shall also be entitled for interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of submission of the application. In view of the discussion made above, out of four appeals, three appeals bearing S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 601/1997 (Nava & Page 10 of 11 Ors. Vs. Vasu Ram & Anr.), S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 600/1997 (Smt. Dhuli & Ors. Vs. Vasu Ram & Anr.) and S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 125/1998 (Smt. Champa & Ors. Vs. Vasu Ram & Anr.) are allowed to the extent that the compensation in all these three appeals is enhanced to the amount of Rs.1,46,100/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of submission of the claim petition before the Tribunal till realization of the amount. S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 599/1997 (Smt. Kesi Vs. Vasu Ram & Anr.) is dismissed. The amount already paid by the respondent shall be adjusted against the enhanced compensation. No order as to costs. [KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI], J. MAMTA Page 11 of 11