[2025:RJ-JP:25215] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5326/2024 1. Smt. Rajkumari Wife Of Jagdish Singh, Aged About 47 Years, Resident Of Village Post Ikran Police Station Chiksana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan). 2. Ajay Singh Son Of Shri Jagdish Singh, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Village Post Ikran Police Station Chiksana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan). 3. Devendra Singh Son Of Jagdish Singh, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Village Post Ikran Police Station Chiksana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan). 4. Rahul Singh Son Of Jagdish Singh, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Village Post Ikran Police Station Chiksana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan). 5. Lalita Daughter Of Jagdish Singh, Aged About 18 Years, Resident Of Village Post Ikran Police Station Chiksana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan). ----Appellants Versus 1. Shyamveer Singh Son Of Shri Gangaram, Resident Of Nagla Putiya, Post Undra, Police Station Chiksana, Tehsil And District Bharatpur (Rajasthan) (Owner Of Motor Hero Splendor Plus Bearing No. Rj-05-Sy-1931). 2. Ramkhiladi Son Of Mohar Singh, Resident Of Village Bansi Birhana, Post Undra, Police Station Chiksana, Tehsil And District Bharatpur (Rajasthan) . (Driver Of Motor Hero Splendor Plus Bearing No. Rj-05-Sy-1931). 3. National Insurance Company Limited And Head Office, Middleton Street Kolkata 700071 Service Through Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited Station Road, New Mandi, Bharatpur (Rajasthan) (Insurance Company Of Motor Hero Splendor Plus No.rj-05-Sy-1931). ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajeev Bhushan Bansal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA [2025:RJ-JP:25215] (2 of 4) [CMA-5326/2024] Order 08/07/2025 1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant for enhancement of the compensation amount which has been awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharatpur (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide judgment and award dated 11.09.2024 in claim petition No. 83/2019. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the claimant appellant preferred the claim petition before the Tribunal with the averments that when Jagdish (deceased) was walking towards his village and reached near 'Ikran Mod', then he was hit by a motorcycle bearing registration No. RJ05-SY1878 which was being driven rashly and negligently. As a result of the accident, the deceased remained hospitalized in R.B.M. Hospital, Bharatpur for treatment and at last he expired as a result of the injuries sustained in the accident. The respondent/s owner and driver by filing their written statement denied the fact of accident. The respondent-insurance company also filed the separate written statement and averred that there was a violation of condition of the insurance policy therefore the insurance company cannot be saddled with the liability of paying compensation. On the basis of pleadings, the Tribunal framed as many as four issues. 3. The evidence was led by the claimants- appellants, however, no evidence was adduced by the non-claimants-respondents. After considering the evidence available on record, the Tribunal allowed the claim petition of the claimants against the non-claimants jointly and severally and held that the claimants are entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs. 13,86,843/- with interest. [2025:RJ-JP:25215] (3 of 4) [CMA-5326/2024] 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased Jagdish remained hospitalized for seven days at R.B.M. Hospital, Bharatpur for the treatment of injuries sustained in the accident and the Tribunal has not allowed a single penny towards the hospital charges. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company submits that since the claimants have not submitted any bill of hospital with regard to hospital charges, the Tribunal had not allowed any compensation towards the hospital charges, therefore the claimants are not entitled for any compensation towards hospital charges. 6. As per the facts on record and findings of the Tribunal, the deceased remained hospitalized for seven days at R.B.M. Hospital, Bharatpur as is evident from the discharge ticket (Exb.41). 7. Since the hospital in which the deceased was admitted for treatment is a private hospital and certainly the hospital must have charged some amount towards bed charge, Doctors' advice and nursing charges. Though the bills may not have been submitted by the claimants, but looking to the fact on record that the deceased remained hospitalized for seven days in a private hospital, at least a minimum amount should have been allowed towards the hospital charges. 8. Taking into consideration the fact of accident and the injuries sustained by the deceased which resulted into death and the fact that the deceased remained hospitalized for seven days in a private hospital, the Court deems just and proper to allow compensation towards hospital charges at a nominal rate of Rs.500/- per day which comes to Rs.3,500/- for seven days. [2025:RJ-JP:25215] (4 of 4) [CMA-5326/2024] 9. Accordingly this appeal is partly allowed. 10. The compensation amount as awarded by the Tribunal vide judgment and award dated 11.09.2024 is enhanced with an additional amount of Rs.3,500/- with interest as per the terms of original award. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /Satyendra/98