[2026:RJ-JP:13585] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4698/2025 1. Minta Devi, aged About 41 Years, W/o The Late Mr. Sumer Singh 2. Kaushal, Aged About 20 Years, S/o The Late Mr. Sumer Singh 3. Kareena, Aged About 19 Years, D/o The Late Mr. Sumer Singh 4. Love Kumar, Aged About 17 Years, S/o The Late Mr. Sumer Singh 5. Bhavna, Aged About 14 Years, D/o The Late Mr. Sumer Singh 6. Ankit, Aged About 12 Years, S/o The Late Mr. Sumer Singh 7. Shalu, Aged About 8 Years, D/o The Late Mr. Sumer Singh 8. Abhay Singh, Aged About 63 Years, S/o Ganga Ram 9. Usha Devi W/o Abhay Singh, Aged About 61 Years, All R/o Nangli Megha, Tehsil Ramgarh And District Alwar, Ra- jasthan Applicant No. 4 To 7 Are Minors Through Their Natural Guardian Mother Minta Devi ----Appellants/ Claimants Versus 1. Vinod Kumar S/o Deep Chand, R/o Village Bhaurarasulpur, Tehsil Ganaur, Sonipat 131101, Haryana, Driver, Motorcycle No. Hr 42-G 7246 2. Ramesh Kumar S/o Deep Chand, R/o Village Bhaura Rasulpur, Tehsil Ganaur, Sonipat 131101, Haryana, Owner, Motorcycle No. Hr 42-G 7246 3. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Manager Balaji Tower, Alwar 301001, Insured, Motorcycle No. Hr 42-G 7246, Policy No. 661600/31/2021/493, Period 05.06.2020 To 04.06.2025 ----Respondents/ Non-Claimants For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Sharan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kartikeya Mishra for Mr. Sanjay Mishra [2026:RJ-JP:13585] (2 of 4) [CMA-4698/2025] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Judgment 01/04/2026 1. This appeal has been filed under section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 08.07.2025, passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alwar (for short ‘Tribunal’) in Claim Petition No.461/2022 whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants-appellants (hereafter referred to as ‘claimants’) was partly allowed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 01.07.2022, when Sumer Singh and his wife were going on a motorcycle, an another motorcycle bearing registration No. HR42-G-7246, hit the motorcycle of Sumer Singh, as a result of which Sumer Singh and his wife sustained injuries and subsequently, Sumer Singh succumbed to injuries. 3. The claimants preferred a claim petition before the learned Tribunal, which was partly allowed, vide impugned judgment and award dated 08.07.2025, and compensation amount of Rs.15,65,312/- was awarded, along with interest @ 6% per annum, in favour of the claimants. 4. Being dissatisfied with the said judgment and award, the claimants have filed the present appeal, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. 5. The sole contention raised by the learned counsel for the claimants is that while calculating the monthly income of the deceased, on the basis of minimum wages notified by the State Government for unskilled labour, learned Tribunal erred in taking 26 days in a month, however, the monthly income of the deceased ought to have been [2026:RJ-JP:13585] (3 of 4) [CMA-4698/2025] calculated by taking 30 days in a month. Hence, he has prayed for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the claimants and has submitted that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and requires no interference by this Court. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. From a bare perusal of the impugned award, it is revealed that the learned Tribunal calculated the monthly income of the deceased, at Rs. 6,734/-, by taking 26 days instead of taking 30 days in a month. 8.1 This Court in the cases of Jalaur Singh and Ors. Vs. Barkat and Ors., S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 6562/2011, decided on 26.03.2012, and Nandu Devi and Ors. Vs. Sohanlal and Ors., S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 769/2017, decided on 23.02.2022, has already held that the monthly income is to be assessed for 30 days instead of 26 days in a month. 8.2 It is undisputed that at the relevant point of time the minimum wage, for an unskilled labour was Rs. 259/- per day. Therefore, the monthly income by taking 30 days in a month would amount to Rs.7,770/- instead of Rs.6734/-. Accordingly, the compensation under the head of loss of dependency is calculated hereunder:- S.No. Particular Amount assessed 1. Monthly Income Rs.259 x 30 = Rs.7,770/- 2. Annual Income Rs.7,770/- x 12 = Rs.93,240/- 3. According to the age of the deceased i.e. 45 years, multiplier 14 to be applied Rs.93,240/- x 14 = Rs.13,05,360/- 4. Add 25% towards future prospects (+) Rs.13,05,360 + Rs.3,26,340 =Rs.16,31,700/- [2026:RJ-JP:13585] (4 of 4) [CMA-4698/2025] 5. As per dependency, 1/5th income to be deduced for personal expenses of the deceased (-) Rs.16,31,700 – Rs.3,26,340 =Rs.13,05,360/- Total compensation Rs.13,05,360/- Less amount awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of dependency (-) Rs.11,31,312/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.1,74,048/- 9. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal under the head of loss of dependency is enhanced by Rs.1,74,048/-. The rest the impugned award shall remain intact. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced amount within a period of two months from today. 10. It is directed that the enhanced amount shall carry the interest in terms of the award passed by the learned Tribunal and the amount shall be disbursed in terms of the award passed by the learned Tribunal. 11. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 12. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J TN/35