[2026:RJ-JP:14062] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2744/2015 Yakoob son of Sumer, age about 32 years, resident of Barodamev Police Station Barodamev, District Alwar (Raj.). ----Claimant-Appellant Versus 1. Manish Gupta son of Shri Jagdish Prasad Gupta, resident of Agrawal Chemicals, 124, South-West Block, Alwar-Driver-cum- Owner of Vehicle. 2. The New India Insurance Company Limited, Division Office at Lakhanda Wala Kuwa, near old power house, Alwar (Raj.) having its Regional Office at Nehru Place Tonk road, Jaiur through its Regional Manager (Insurance Company). ----Non-Claimants-Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Girish Khandelwal with Mr. K.I. Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amar Nath Pareek Mr. Aayush Goyal Mr. Lucky Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 06/04/2026 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellant-claimant (for short ‘claimant’) against the judgment and award dated 29.01.2015 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Laxmangarh District Alwar (for short ‘Tribunal’) in Claim Petition No.11/2012, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant was partly allowed. 2. The brief facts of the case, as pleaded in the claim petition, are that on 27.06.2011, the claimant was travelling from Alwar to Barodamev along with his friend on a motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ-02-SK-9661. At around 12:00 PM, a truck bearing registration No.RJ-02-GA-4196, being driven by its driver in rash and negligent [2026:RJ-JP:14062] (2 of 5) [CMA-2744/2015] manner, hit the claimant’s motorcycle, as a result of which, the claimant and his friend sustained grievous injuries. 3. The claimant filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal claiming compensation under various heads, on account of injuries sustained during accident. 4. The learned Tribunal vide impugned judgment and award partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a total sum of Rs.4,08,740/- in favour of the claimant along with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. 5. Being dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award dated 29.01.2015, the instant appeal has been filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation so awarded. 6. Learned counsel for the claimant has made the following submissions:- i. The learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant as Rs.4,000/- per month, on the basis of minimum wages notified for an unskilled worker at the time of accident i.e. Rs.135/- per day, whereas, the same ought to have been assessed as Rs.4,050/- per month. ii. The learned Tribunal has failed to make any addition in the income of the claimant towards future prospects. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the claimant and has submitted that the learned Tribunal has erroneously applied the multiplier of 18, however, considering the age of the claimant at the time of accident i.e. 29 years, multiplier of 17 should have been applied. [2026:RJ-JP:14062] (3 of 5) [CMA-2744/2015] 8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. This Court finds substance in the first contention raised by the learned counsel for the claimant that the learned Tribunal has erred in computing the monthly income of the claimant, even as per the minimum wages notified for an unskilled worker. From a bare perusal of the impugned judgment and award, it is revealed that the learned Tribunal calculated the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/-, on the basis of minimum wages payable to an unskilled worker at the time of accident i.e. Rs.135/- per day, however, it should have been assessed as Rs. 4,050/- per month (Rs.135 x 30). Hence, the compensation under the head of loss of earning capacity will be calculated considering Rs.4,050/- as the monthly income of the claimant. 10. With regard to the second contention raised by the learned counsel for the claimant that the learned Tribunal has erred in not granting future prospects to the claimant, this Court is of the view that considering the age of the claimant at the time of accident i.e. 29 years and having regards to the guidelines laid down in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, an addition @ 40% would be made in the income of the claimant towards future prospects. 11. Moreover, this Court also finds substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the learned Tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier of 18. Since, at the time of accident, the age of the claimant was 29 years, therefore, in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi [2026:RJ-JP:14062] (4 of 5) [CMA-2744/2015] (supra), multiplier of 17 will be applied while calculating the loss of earning capacity. 12. Thus, in view of the above discussion, the compensation payable to the claimant is re-computed as under:- S.No. Particular Amount assessed 1. Monthly Income Rs.135 x 30 = Rs.4,050/- 2. Annual Income Rs.4,050 x 12 = Rs.48,600/- 3. According to the age of the claimant i.e.29 years, multiplier of 17 to be applied Rs.48,600/- x 17 = Rs.8,26,200/- 4. Add 40% towards future prospects (+) Rs.8,26,200 /- + Rs.3,30,480/- = Rs.11,56,680/- 5. Loss of earning capacity (Disability of 36%) Rs.11,56,680 /- x 36% = Rs.4,16,404/- 6. Medical Bills Rs.37,700/- 7. Pain and Suffering Rs.60,000/- Total amount of compensation (S.No. 5+6+7) Rs.5,14,104/- Less amount awarded by the Tribunal Rs.4,08,740/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.5,14,104/- – Rs. 4,08,740/- = Rs.1,05,364/- 13. Accordingly, the compensation amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.1,05,364/-. The rest of the impugned award shall remain intact. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount within a period of two months from today. 14. It is directed that the enhanced amount shall carry the rate of interest in terms of the award passed by the learned Tribunal, from the date of filing of the claim petition till the recovery. The amount shall be disbursed in terms of the award passed by the learned Tribunal. 15. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 16. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. [2026:RJ-JP:14062] (5 of 5) [CMA-2744/2015] (SANDEEP TANEJA),J AVINASH GULERIA /15