[2025:RJ-JP:17516] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 242/2017 Sriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Corporate Office At E-8, Epip, Riico Industrial Area Sita Pura, Jaipur Through Its Constituted Attorney ----Appellant Versus 1. Anita W/o Shri Veer Singh @ Diti Singh, R/o Sadak Ka Pura Mauja Arnota Tehsil Bah, Distt. Aagra Uttarpradesh 2. Laxminarayan S/o Shri Veer Singh @ Dity Singh, Claimant No. 2 Is Minor Through Natu, R/o Sadak Ka Pura Mauja Arnota Tehsil Bah, Distt. Aagra Uttarpradesh 3. Dropadi W/o Late Shri Beniram, R/o Sadak Ka Pura Mauja Arnota Tehsil Bah, Distt. Aagra Uttarpradesh 4. Sarvesh S/o Murarilal R/o Pura Hadtoli Tehsil Bah, Distt. Agra Uttarpradesh 5. Hariom S/o Murarilal R/o Pura Hadtoli Tehsil Bah, Distt. Agra Uttarpradesh ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rishipal Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. K. Garg HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 24/04/2025 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the impugned award dated 30.11.2016 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal in claim case No.511/2015 titled as "Anita & Ors. Vs. Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors." 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the claim petition filed by the claimants-respondents No.1 to 3 under [2025:RJ-JP:17516] (2 of 7) [CMA-242/2017] Sections 140 and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred as "the Act of 1988") before Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Dholpur (hereinafter to be referred as "learned Tribunal") against the appellant and the respondents No.4 and 5 on account of alleged loss suffered due to death of Shri Veeri Singh @ Diti Singh in the road accident when he along with Rajkumar and others, were travelling as labour towards Morena on 09.08.2011 in a tractor bearing No.UP-80-BW-8025 attached with the trolley and loaded with Bricks for constructing Water Tank for irrigation of agricultural land. When they reached ahead of Sagarpeda and Dholpur, the deceased step down from the tractor for drinking water and when he was returning towards tractor, the tractor driver started it and negligently ran over the small stones lying there resulting the trolley turned turtle and climbed over the deceased standing there. As a result of the accident, Shri Veeri Singh died and claim petition has been filed by the wife, minor son and mother of the deceased. 3. On receipt of the notices to the claim petition, the appellant- Insurance Company filed the reply thereof by denying the averments made in the claim petition and the Insurance Company specifically took a plea that involvement of vehicle is doubtful, because driver was not having a valid license and the subject vehicle has not been used in terms of Insurance policy, there is breach of condition of Insurance Policy, therefore Insurance Company is not liable to make payment. 4. Respondent no. 3 and 4 also filed their replies, denying the averments in the claim petition. However, they acknowledged that the vehicle was insured and submitted that if they were held [2025:RJ-JP:17516] (3 of 7) [CMA-242/2017] liable, the claimants could seek compensation from the Insurance Company. 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned MACT Court framed following issues for consideration: 1- vk;k fnukad 09-08-2011 dks VzsDVj ua- ;wih80chMCY;w&8025 VzkWyh esa jsr Hkjdj fiukgV ls eqjSuk tk jgk FkkA VzsDVj ds lkFk ohjhflag mQZ MhVh flag] jktdqekj cxSjk FksA lqcg djhc 4&5 cts lkxjikM+s ls vkxs ohjhflag mQZ MhVh flag y?kq'kadk ds fy, mrjkA og tc VzsDVj dh rjQ okfil vk jgk Fkk rks pkyd us VzsDVj dks >Vds ls LVkVZ fd;k ftlls rstxfr esa vkrs gh VzsDVj Vzkyh vlarqfyr gksdj iyV xbZ o ohjhflag mQZ MhVh flag tks fd uhps [kM+k Fkk VzsDVj Vzkyh ds uhps vkus ls ?kVukLFky ij gh e`R;q gks xbZ \ 2- vk;k oDr ?kVuk nq?kZVuk dkjd okgu pkyd oS/k ,oa izHkkoh pkyd vuqKk i= /kkjh ugha Fkk okgu ij oS/k ,oa izHkkoh ijfeV o fQVuSl ugha Fkk rFkk okgu dk mi;ksx o miHkksx chek ikfylh dh 'krksZa ds foijhr fd;k tk jgk Fkk ,slh fLFkfr esa chek daiuh izfrdj vnk;xh ds fy, mRrjnk;h ugha gS \ 3- vk;k nq?kZVuk la;qDr ,oa lkeqfgd mis{kk ,oa ykijokgh dk ifj.kke gS \ ;fn ,slk gS rks izfrdj ij D;k izHkko gS \ 4- vk;k vkosndx.k foi{khx.k ls {kfriwfrZ jkf'k izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gS ;fn gka rks fdlls] fdruh o fdl izdkj \ 5- vuqrks"k \ 6. Upon examining the evidence and arguments presented, the learned MACT Court decided issues Nos.1 to 3 in favour of the claimants. Consequently, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.12,95,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum w.e.f. 05.09.2011. 7. Being Aggrieved by the judgment and award, the Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal. [2025:RJ-JP:17516] (4 of 7) [CMA-242/2017] 8. Learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submits that the findings recorded by the learned MACT Court on issue no.3 are unsustainable. He further submits that at the time of the accident, the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving license. He further contended that the tractor, attached with the trolley, was being used to carry goods at the relevant time and the deceased himself was traveling on it, which constituted a breach of the insurance policy. Additionally, he submits that the subject vehicle was being used for a commercial purpose, therefore he submitted that the Insurance Company be exonerated from liability. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company further submits that on the issue of quantum, the learned Tribunal had wrongly calculated the future prospects and that its findings were recorded by the learned MACT Court, contrary to the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in 2017(16) SCC 680. 9. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the claimants supported the impugned award and submitted that award is based on a sound appreciation of the evidence and pleadings of the parties and did not warrant any interference. 10. He further submitted that issue of the validity and effectiveness of the driving license has been finally settled by the verdicts of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of M/s. Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ramha Devi reported in [2024] 8 SCC 577 and Mukund Dewagan Vs. Oriented Insurance Company Limited reported in 2017 (3) ACC 360, therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the appeal. [2025:RJ-JP:17516] (5 of 7) [CMA-242/2017] 11. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 12. The first argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant with regard to the fact that the driver was not having a valid and effective driving license. However, this argument is no longer res integra in light of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in M/s. Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra) as well as in the matter of Mukund Dewagan Vs. Oriented Insurance Company Limited (supra). Therefore, this particular argument advanced by the appellant is not well founded. 13. The learned Counsel for the appellant challenges the principles of law applied by the learned MACT Court in awarding compensation to the claimant. In support of the said contention, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. (supra). 14. Upon taking consideration of the factual matrix and the relevant legal principles, this court observes that the learned Tribunal, in assessing the loss of future income, incorrectly added 50% amount towards the future prospects, considering the age of the deceased. In the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. (supra), only 40% of the established income should have been considered towards future prospects. Similarly, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal arbitrarily adopted an income of Rs.5000/- per month for the deceased without any basis warrants consideration. It is noted that at the time of [2025:RJ-JP:17516] (6 of 7) [CMA-242/2017] accident i.e. 09.08.2021, the prevailing minimum wages fixed for unskilled labour was Rs.135/- per day. Consequently, the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant regarding the erroneous calculation of income by the learned Tribunal appears to be just and proper. 15. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the findings recorded by the learned MACT Court with respect to the quantum of compensation are unsustainable. Therefore, in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., the compensation amount is hereby revised as under: Annual income Rs.135/-x30x12=48,600/- Future prospects (+) 40% Rs.68,040/- Less:1/3 deduction (Personal Expenses) Rs.45,360/- Income with Multiplier of 18 Rs.8,16,480/- Loss of Love and Affection @ Rs.40,000/- per person(+) Rs.1,20,000/- Loss of Estate (+) Rs.15,000/- Funeral Expenses (+) Rs.15,000/- Total Rs.9,66,480/- Already awarded amount(-) Rs.12,95,000/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.12,95,000/- – Rs.9,66,480/-= Rs.3,28,520/- 16. Accordingly, in light of the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), the total claim for compensation is reassessed at Rs.9,66,800/-. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is hereby reduced from Rs.12,95,000/- to Rs.9,66,480/-. [2025:RJ-JP:17516] (7 of 7) [CMA-242/2017] 17. That the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that there is a violation of the terms of Insurance policy is not supported with evidence available on the record and the learned MACT Court while deciding issue no.2, categorically recorded the finding that neither there is a violation of the terms of policy nor the vehicle in question is used for commercial activity. 18. That it is pertinent to mention here that the learned MACT Court has granted interest @ 9% per annum over the awarded amount but taking note of prevailing rate of interest. The rate of interest awarded under the award appears to be on a higher side. Therefore, the same is hereby modified and reduced from 9% per annum to 5% per annum. 19. Accordingly, the appeal preferred by the Insurance Company is partly allowed and compensation awarded by the learned MACT is hereby reduced from Rs.12,95,000/- to Rs.9,66,480/- and interest awarded @9% per annum is also reduced from @ 9% per annum to @ 5% per annum and rest of the award is maintained. 20. All pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/124