[2026:RJ-JP:6716] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1670/2016 Ramanand Alias Mukesh S/o Kailashchand, Resident of Fatehpura Khurd, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur ----Appellant Versus 1. Babu Lal Yadav S/o Banshidhar Yadav, Resident of Fatehpura Khurd, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Driver) 2. (a) Rudaram S/o Seduram Yadav, Resident of Khelna, Tehsil Kotputli, Post Thana Pragpura, District Jaipur. 2. (b) Manglaram S/o Sedu Ram, Resident of Khelna, Police Thana Pragpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur 2. (c) Prahlad Son of Nanuram, resident of Panchpahadi, Police Thana, Pragpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur 3. United India Insurance Company Limited through Zonal Manager, Zonal Office Second, 20, Mohan House, Transport Nagar, Jaipur (Insurance Company) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishipal Agarwal JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 12/02/2026 1. By way of filing the present appeal, a challenge has been led to the impugned award dated 11.02.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shahpura (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) by which the claim petition submitted by the claimant-appellant (for short, ‘the claimant’) has been partly allowed and a compensation of Rs. 1,93,560/- has been awarded to the claimant. [2026:RJ-JP:6716] (2 of 5) [CMA-1670/2016] 2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the same, the instant appeal has been preferred before this Court for enhancement of the amount of compensation. 3. Counsel for the claimant submits that the claimant met with an accident on 21.11.2009 while he was walking on a road and the driver of the truck bearing No. RJ32-R-1257 caused the accident by driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner due to which the claimant has suffered injuries on various parts of his body. Counsel further submits that the claimant has suffered 18.05% permanent disability. Counsel submits that while passing the impugned award, the learned Tribunal has not taken into count the age of the claimant, which was 18 years at the time of accident and the theory of multiplier has not been applied. Counsel further submits that under the head of pain, suffering and mental agony, a lump sum amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal. Counsel submits that similarly, not a single penny has been awarded under the head of future prospects in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in 2017(16) SCC 680, hence under these circumstances, the impugned award needs to be suitably enhanced. 4. Per contra, counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the claimant and submitted that while assessing the income of the claimant, exorbitant compensation has been awarded in favour of the claimant. Counsel submits that as per the circular/notification [2026:RJ-JP:6716] (3 of 5) [CMA-1670/2016] issued by the Department of Labour, Government of Rajasthan, per day wages of unskilled labour was Rs. 100/- at the relevant time but the same has been determined as Rs. 145/- per day without any basis. Counsel submits that the income of the claimant should have been determined on the basis of the circular which was prevailing at the relevant time, hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted for the said purpose and the impugned award shall not be disturbed by way of enhancement under the other heads. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Perusal of the record indicates that at the time of accident, the age of the appellant was 18 years and he suffered injuries on various parts of his body. He suffered 18.05% permanent disability but while passing the impugned award, the Tribunal has failed to apply the theory of multiplier. In the light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. reported in 2009(6) SCC 122, and looking to the fact that the claimant falls under the age group of 15-20 years, as he was 18 years, hence under these circumstances, the multiplier of 18 would be applicable in the instant case. Similarly, the claimant is entitled to get compensation under the head of future prospects i.e. 40% as his age was below 40 years and he was self employed in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra) but considering the fact that the income of the claimant has been determined on higher side i.e. 145/- per [2026:RJ-JP:6716] (4 of 5) [CMA-1670/2016] day, the same should have been determined as Rs. 100/- per day as per the notification issued by the Department of Labour, Government of Rajasthan. 7. In the considered opinion of this Court, the notification issued by the Department of Labour, Government of Rajasthan, the claimant is entitled to get Rs. 100/- per day for 30 days in the light of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Nandu Devi and Anr. Vs. Sohan Lal and Ors. while deciding S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 769/2019 and Co-ordinate bench of this Court in Jalaur Singh and Ors. Vs. Barkat Singh and Ors., reported in 2012 (2) MACT Raj. 692. 8. This Court further finds that under the head of pain, suffering and mental agony, the Tribunal has awarded a meagre amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- which needs to be suitably enhanced by this Court. Accordingly, the compensation under the head of pain, suffering and mental agony is enhanced to Rs. 2,00,000/-. 9. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the claimant is entitled to get following enhanced amount as reproduced in the table hereunder: Monthly Income (Along with 40% future prospects) 100 X 30 = Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 3,000 + 1,200 = Rs. 4,200/- Annual Income Rs. 4,200 X 12 =Rs. 50,400/- Multiplier to be applied 18 Rs. 50,400 X 18 = Rs.9,07,200/- Loss of Income (owing to 18.05% disability) Rs. 9,07,200 X 18.05% =1,63,749.6p Medical bill 23,560/- Pain and Suffering Rs. 2,00,000/- Total Compensation Awardable Rs. 3,87,309.6p [2026:RJ-JP:6716] (5 of 5) [CMA-1670/2016] Less compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs. 1,93,560/- Enhanced Compensation Rs. 1,93,749.6p 10. The appeal accordingly stands allowed and the impugned award passed by the Tribunal stands modified to the extent that the appellant-claimant is entitled to get a further sum of Rs.1,93,749.6p by way of the enhanced compensation and the remaining terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact. 11. It is further ordered that out of the enhanced amount a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- be deposited in the Savings Bank Account of the claimant and the remaining amount be deposited in a fixed deposit with any Nationalized Bank initially for a period of three years and the interest accrued on the said amount shall be paid to the claimant on monthly basis. 12. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced amount within a period of four weeks from today with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/12