Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Aasubai And Ors vs Tararam And Ors. (2025:Rj-Jd:37593) on 21 August, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:37593]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 3345/2017
1. Aasubai W/o Late Shri Manaram @ Munnaram,
2. Samudi D/o Late Shri Manaram @ Munnaram,
3. Sundar S/o Late Shri Manaram @ Munnaram,
4. Kama D/o Late Shri Manaram @ Munnaram,
5. Prakash S/o Late Shri Manaram @ Munnaram,
6. Laxman S/o Late Shri Manaram @ Munnaram,
7. Pukhraj S/o Late Shri Manaram @ Munnaram,
8. Magi Devi W/o Late Shri Asuram, All By Caste Dholi, Resident
Of Barjasar, Tehsil Phalodi, District Jodhpur. At Present
Resident Of Maa Chavanda Colony, Jodhpur Raj.. Appellant-
Claimants No. 2 To 7 Are Minor Through Their Natural
Guardian Mother Smt. Aasubai W/o Late Shri Manaram @
Munnaram.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Tararam S/o Shri Bhartaram, By Caste Kumhar, Resident Of
Khariberi, Tehsil Shergarh, District Jodhpur. - Registered
Owner Truck No. Rj19 Ga 0144
2.(a) Bhomaram S/o Shri Andaram, Resident Of Balesar, Tehsil
Shergarh, District Jodhpur. - Registered Owner Truck No. Rj19
Ga 0144
(b). Charan Ram S/o Shri Amanaram, Resident Of Balesar, Tehsil
Shergarh, District Jodhpur. Owner As Per Cover Note Truck No.
Rj19 Ga 0144
3. Prem Singh S/o Shri Jor Singh, Resident of Jinjaniyala, Tehsil
Shergarh, District Jodhpur (Owner as per cover note Truck
No.RJ19GA0144)
4. The New India Assurance Company Limited, Through
Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Abhay Chambers, Jalori
Gate, Jodhpur. Insurer Truck No. Rj19 Ga 0144
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. SK Sankhla
For Respondent(s) : Mr. DK Bhootra
Mr. Amit Saran
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 09:36:46 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37593] (2 of 5) [CMA-3345/2017]
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Judgment
21/08/2025
1. The instant misc. appeal has been filed by the
claimants/appellants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
(‘the Act of 1988’) challenging the validity of judgment/award dated
29.08.2017 passed by the learned Judge, MACT Jodhpur, in MAC Case
No.424/2011 whereby claim petition of the claimants was allowed and
were awarded an amount of compensation to the tune of
Rs.10,08,160/- in total with the interest @ 9% p.a while fastening the
liability upon respondents Nos.1 to 4 jointly and severally.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 24.03.2011 at about 11:30 PM,
deceased Munnaram along with other members were going Barjasar
from his house Sevda in jeep bearing registration no.RJ-19C-3922.
Suddenly, non-claimant driver driving the vehicle jeep bearing
Registration No.RJ19/GA–0144 coming from the opposite side in a rash
and negligent manner, hit the jeep resulting into death of Munnaram.
Subsequently, the appellants/claimants filed the claim petition before
the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation on account of death of the
deceased Munnaram.
3. As per the pleadings, learned Tribunal framed the four issues.
Thereafter, claimants in support of their claim petition, exhibited several
documents to prove their case whereas the respondent insurer
produced Rajiv Bhadu as NAW-1 and documents Ex.A1 and A was also
produced in defence.
4. After hearing both the parties, the learned Tribunal allowed the
claim petition of the claimants and vide judgment/award dated
29.08.2017 awarded quantum of compensation to the tune of
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 09:36:46 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37593] (3 of 5) [CMA-3345/2017]
Rs.10,08,160/- with the interest @9% p.a. and being dissatisfied of the
award, the claimants have preferred the claim petition.
5. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants submits that due to
untimely of death of deceased Ashubai, family members had suffered
mental loss and pain but the learned Tribunal failed to take the same
into consideration and has awarded a meager amount towards
consortium as the dependents are eight in number. He also submits that
as per the Minimum Wages in 2011 of unskilled labour was Rs.3,510/-
monthly. He further submits that the oral evidence given by the wife of
the deceased regarding his income was that he earns Rs.12,000/- per
month, which has not been refuted by the counsel for the respondent
Insurance Company and therefore the learned Tribunal has erred in
assessing the loss of income while taking the income of the deceased as
Rs.3,510/-. He also submits that the learned Tribunal has not awarded
any amount under the head i.e. loss of estate, thus the same should be
awarded.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurance company
vehemently opposes the submissions advanced by the appellants’
counsel but, he is not in position to dispute the same.
7. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced at Bar and
have gone through the impugned award.
8. This Court finds that Looking at the facts and circumstances of the
present case, the learned Tribunal has fallen in error in computing the
income of the deceased on the basis of the minimum wages for
unskilled labour i.e. ₹3,510 per month in the year 2011. It is an
admitted position that the deceased was engaged in house construction
work and not an unskilled labourer. The oral testimony of the wife of the
deceased shows that he was earning ₹12,000 per month. Even if strict
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 09:36:46 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37593] (4 of 5) [CMA-3345/2017]
proof of such income is not forthcoming, this Hon’ble Court, keeping in
view the principles laid down in Ramachandrappa v. Royal
Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., (2011) 13 SCC 236,
wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in absence of
documentary evidence the notional income has to be assessed on the
basis of nature of work, age, background and circumstances of the
case, deems it just and proper to fix the monthly income at ₹8,000.
Further, it is well settled that while assessing compensation under the
Motor Vehicles Act, a liberal approach is to be adopted to ensure that
the dependents of the deceased are not deprived of their rightful
entitlement (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017)
16 SCC 680). Considering the number of dependents (8 in the present
case), fixation of income at a meager ₹3,510 is wholly unjust, arbitrary
and contrary to the social welfare objective of the legislation.
Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to reassess the income of
the deceased at ₹8,000 per month. This Court also finds that amount
under the heads i.e. loss of estate should be awarded and an amount
under the head of consortium needs to be reassessed in the light
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance
Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017)16
SCC 680. After coming to the conclusion that the amount of
compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal deserves to be modified,
both the counsel were directed to jointly submit the calculation of the
compensation awardable to the claimants afresh in light of the
guidelines laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the cases of
Pranay Sethi (supra) and Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104. The award is modified in
the following manner:-
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 09:36:46 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37593] (5 of 5) [CMA-3345/2017]
Particulars Awarded by Awarded by this
Tribunal Court
Income of the deceased Rs.3,510/- Rs.8,000/-
Calculation of Loss of
Income:-
1/5th (deductions as per
dependents)
Rs.7,58,160/- Rs.16,12,800/-
Rs.8,000/- minus Rs.1,600/- =
Rs.6,400/- x 12 (per annum) x
15 (multiplier) + 40% (future
prospects)
(Add) Rs.18,150/- towards Rs.25,000/- Rs.36,300/-
funeral expenses and Rs.18,150/- (funeral
towards loss of estate expenses) +
Rs.25,000/-
(filial
consortium)
(Add) Rs.48,400/- towards loss of Rs.2,00,000/- (in Rs.3,87,200/-
consortium x 8 (parents, wife and total)
four children)
TOTAL Rs.10,08,160/- Rs.20,36,900/
ENHANCED AMOUNT (Rs.20,36,900/- minus Rs.10,28,140/-
Rs.10,08,160/-
9. The judgment-cum-award dated 29.08.2017 passed by the
learned Judge, MACT Jodhpur in MAC Case No.424/2011 is
enhanced/modified in the terms stated above. The claimants are thus,
held entitled to get enhanced compensation of Rs.10,28,140/- in
accordance with the directions given by the learned Tribunal. The
enhanced amount shall carry interest as awarded by the learned
Tribunal from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of
deposit and shall be paid by the respondents jointly and severally. Any
amount, if disbursed, shall be adjusted accordingly.
10. No order as to costs.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J
surabhii/364-
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 09:36:46 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)