[2025:RJ-JP:27369] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3475/2017 1. Smt. Rekha W/o Late Shri Rajesh Kumar, R/o House No. B-51, Ramkrapal Nagar, Purana Bhurasingha Ji, Jaipur Road, Alwar. 2. Abhishek S/o Late Shri Rajesh Kumar, R/o House No. B- 51, Ramkrapal Nagar, Purana Bhurasingha Ji, Jaipur Road, Alwar. Minor Through Their Natural Guardian And Mother Smt. Rekha W/o Late Shri Rajesh Kumar. 3. Seenu D/o Late Shri Rajesh Kumar, R/o House No. B-51, Ramkrapal Nagar, Purana Bhurasingha Ji, Jaipur Road, Alwar. Minor Through Their Natural Guardian And Mother Smt. Rekha W/o Late Shri Rajesh Kumar. 4. Neha D/o Late Shri Rajesh Kumar, R/o House No. B-51, Ramkrapal Nagar, Purana Bhurasingha Ji, Jaipur Road, Alwar. Minor Through Their Natural Guardian And Mother Smt. Rekha W/o Late Shri Rajesh Kumar. 5. Ranglal S/o Late Shri Ganesh Ram, R/o House No. B-51, Ramkrapal Nagar, Purana Bhurasingha Ji, Jaipur Road, Alwar. 6. Karanbai W/o Shri Ranglal, R/o House No. B-51, Ramkrapal Nagar, Purana Bhurasingha Ji, Jaipur Road, Alwar. 7. Kumari Kavita D/o Shri Ranglal, R/o House No. B-51, Ramkrapal Nagar, Purana Bhurasingha Ji, Jaipur Road, Alwar. ----Claimants/Appellants Versus 1. Yadram S/o Shri Kajodmal, R/o Nyabas, Village Bolaka, Tehsil-Tahla District Alwar. (Driver) 2. Radheshyam Sharma S/o Shri Ghanmman Lal Sharma R/o Village Leloj Ka Golathana, Tehsil Basawa, District Dausa. (Owner) 3. United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Manager, Regional Office At Sahara, Chambers, Tonk ----Non-claimants/Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vikas Bana For Respondent(s) : Mr. V.P. Mathur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 22/07/2025 1. The present appeal has been filed on behalf of the claimants/appellants under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 30.01.2017 passed by learned [2025:RJ-JP:27369] (2 of 5) [CMA-3475/2017] Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Alwar in claim case No.439/2015, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants was partly allowed and awarded the compensation of Rs.13,22,500/-. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 11.03.2015, the deceased- Rajesh Kumar was going on foot at Police Station Kishangarhbas, suddenly a tractor, bearing registration No. RJ-02-1R-8997 being driven by the non-claimant/respondent No.1 in rash and negligent manner hit the deceased and as a result of which, Rajesh Kumar sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. An FIR was lodged on account of the said accident, therefore, the claim petition was filed by the claimants/appellants for awarding just compensation. 3. It was stated in the claim petition that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 27 years and was working as a driver and agriculturist and earning salary of Rs.22,000/- per month, therefore, prayed for awarding just compensation. 4. After receiving notice to the claim petition, the non- claimant/respondent Nos.1 & 2 filed reply to the claim petition and denied the averments made in the claim petition and submitted that there is no negligence of the driver of tractor in the accident rather the deceased himself was negligent, therefore, the claimants are not entitled for any compensation. It was further submitted that the vehicle in question is insured with the non- claimant/respondent No.3- Insurance Company, and if any liability is found due, the same may be fastened upon the Insurance Company, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. 5. The non-claimant/respondent No.3- Insurance Company also filed reply to the claim petition and denied the averments made in [2025:RJ-JP:27369] (3 of 5) [CMA-3475/2017] the claim petition and contended that there is delay in lodging the FIR. It was further submitted that the vehicle in question was not used for agriculture purposes, therefore, there is violation of insurance policy. It was further submitted that the accident occurred due to negligence of the deceased himself and the driver of the insured vehicle was not having valid and effective driving license, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation and accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. 6. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed four (4) issues. 7. In order to substantiate the averments made in the claim petition, the claimants examined AW-1 Ranglal, AW-2 Keshav Kumar Sharma, AW-3 Sugan Singh and AW-4 Vijay Kumar Meena and produced Ex.1 to Ex.43. 8. The non-claimant/respondent Nos.1 & 2 despite granting opportunity did not lead any evidence and therefore, their right to lead evidence was closed. 9. In rebuttal, the non-claimant/respondent No.3- Insurance Company produced Ex. NA-1 to NA-7. 10. After considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, learned Tribunal decided all the issues in favour of the claimants and after considering the age of the deceased to be 27 years and monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.5,000/- per month, awarded a compensation of Rs.13,22,500/-. 11. Being aggrieved of which, the claimants/appellants have preferred the present appeal. [2025:RJ-JP:27369] (4 of 5) [CMA-3475/2017] 12. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants submits that the learned Tribunal awarded inadequate amount under the heads of loss of consortium and conventional heads. He further submits that in view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680, the impugned award is required to be modified to some extent. 13. Per contra, learned counsel for the non-claimant/respondent No.3- Insurance Company vehemently opposes the submissions and submits that the impugned award is based on a correct appreciation of facts and law. He further submits that the learned Tribunal has awarded future prospects @ 50% which is already on higher side, therefore, the impugned award does not call for any interference and prayed for the dismissal of the present appeal. 14. Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 15. From bare perusal of the record of the case, it is revealed that the deceased lost his life in an accident which took place on 11.03.2015 and from the record of the case, it is also reflected that at the time of accident, the deceased was 27 years of age and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month but the amount awarded under the heads of love and affection and consortium is quite inadequate. 16. If the facts and circumstances of the case is analyzed in the light of judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra) the impugned award is required to be enhanced to some extent. [2025:RJ-JP:27369] (5 of 5) [CMA-3475/2017] 17. Accordingly, after taking wholesome consideration of above facts, this Court is of the view that the compensation awarded under the impugned award is required to be enhanced to some extent and same is enhanced as per the table made hereinunder:- Loss of Income (+) Rs.5,000/-x12x17=Rs.10,20,000/- Deduction 1/4 (Dependents-4)(-) (-)Rs.2,55,000/- Future Prospects 40% (+) Rs.3,06,000/- Love and Affection (Rs.40,000/-x7)(+) Rs.2,80,000/- Funeral Expenses & Loss of Estate(+) Rs.15,000/- + Rs.15,000/- = Rs.30,000/- Total Rs.13,81,000/- Already Awarded Amount(-) Rs.13,22,500/- Enhanced compensation Rs.58,500/- 18. Therefore, the present appeal is partly allowed and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is modified and enhanced to Rs.13,81,000/- from the original amount of Rs.13,22,500/-. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rs.58,500/- before the learned concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal within 60 days from the date of passing of this order. The claimant is also entitled to get interest on the enhanced amount of Rs.58,500/- at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until the realization of the said amount. 19. Accordingly, the present appeal stands partly allowed. 20. All pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA-56