[2026:RJ-JP:15890] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1489/2014 1. Parmeshwari Devi wife of Bholaram, aged 48 years, 2. Bholaram son of Manglaram, aged 53 years, Both resident of village Harsh, Tehsil & District Sikar. ----Appellants Versus 1. Pawan Kumar son of Ramchandra, resident of Gori Ka Bass, Thana Govindgarh, District Jaipur (Driver). 2. Hanuman Sahay Yadav, son of Ram Avtar Yadav, resident of Chota Gudha, Tehsil Chomu, Distrist Jaipur (Owner). 3. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, having its regional office at Anand Bhawan, Sansar Chandra Road, Jaipur through its Regional, Manager (Insurance Company). 4. Laxmi Devi wife of Indraraj, aged 25 years, resident of Village Ked, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vinay Mathur with Mr. Ashish Mittal & Ms. Vinita Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ankit Kumar Mr. Amar Nath Pareek HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 16/04/2026 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellants- claimants (for short ‘claimants’) against the impugned judgment and award dated 16.01.2014 passed by the Additional District Judge No.3, Sikar and Judge Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar (for short ‘Tribunal’), in Claim Case No.308/2013, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants was partly allowed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 24.11.2010 Prakash (since deceased) was travelling in a Maruti Car bearing registration No.DL-3-CM-6036, towards Ramu Ka Bass on Jaipur [2026:RJ-JP:15890] (2 of 5) [CMA-1489/2014] Road. He was driving the car at a moderate speed and on the correct side of the road by following the traffic rules. When he reached near Ramu Ka Bass crossing on National Highway No.11, a Marshal Jeep bearing registration No.RJ-13-UA-0137, which was going ahead of his car, being driven in a rash and negligent manner by the respondent No.1, suddenly took an unexpected turn without giving any indication due to which the car collided with the jeep, as a result, Prakash sustained grievous injuries and subsequently succumbed to the same. 3. Thereafter, a claim petition was filed by the claimants (parents of the deceased) as well as respondent No.4 (wife of the deceased). However, on 24.12.2012, respondent No.4 got remarried to one Mr. Indraraj S/o Raghubir at Jhunjhunu. The claim petition was partly allowed by the learned Tribunal vide judgment and award dated 16.01.2014. A total sum of Rs.6,65,000/- was awarded in favour of the claimants and respondent No.4 along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. 4. Further, the learned Tribunal, out of the aforesaid compensation amount, awarded Rs.4,65,000/- along with entire interest amount @6% P.A in favour of the respondent No.4 and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each was awarded to the claimants. 5. Being dissatisfied with the impugned award, the instant appeal has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation so awarded by the learned Tribunal. 6. Learned counsel for the claimants has made the following submissions:- [2026:RJ-JP:15890] (3 of 5) [CMA-1489/2014] i. The learned Tribunal has omitted to make any addition in the income of the deceased towards future prospects. ii. Under the head of loss of consortium, each of the claimants is entitled to get Rs.40,000/- separately. iii. The compensation under the head of funeral expenses needs to be enhanced to Rs.15,000/-. iv. The claimants are also entitled to get compensation under the head of loss of estate. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the claimants and has submitted that the award is just and reasonable and requires no interference by this Court. 8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. Having considered the rival submissions and having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Company Vs. Nanuram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors. reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court finds substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the claimants. 9.1 From a bare perusal of the impugned award, it is revealed that while calculating the loss of dependency, the learned Tribunal has not made any addition in the income of the deceased towards future prospects. Undisputedly, at the time of the accident, the age of the deceased was 25 years and therefore, addition @40% is required to be made in the income of the deceased towards future prospects. [2026:RJ-JP:15890] (4 of 5) [CMA-1489/2014] 9.2 Further, each of the claimants is entitled to get compensation of Rs.40,000/- separately, under the head of loss of consortium and compensation of Rs.15,000/- under the head of loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses. 10. Thus, in view of the above discussion, the compensation payable to the claimants is re-assessed as under:- S.No. Particular Amount assessed 1. Monthly Income Rs.150 X 30 = Rs.4,500/- 2. Annual Income Rs.4,500/- X 12 = Rs.54,000/- 3. According to the age of the deceased i.e.25 years, multiplier of 18 to be applied Rs.54,000/- X 18 = Rs.9,72,000/- 4. As per dependency, 1/3rd income to be deduced for personal expenses of the deceased (-) Rs.9,72,000 /- – Rs.3,24,000/- = Rs.6,48,000/- 5. Add 40% towards future prospects (+) Rs.6,48,000 /- + Rs.2,59,200/- = Rs.9,07,200/- 6. Total loss of income Rs.9,07,200 /- 7. Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000 X 3) Rs.1,20,000/- 8. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/- 9. Loss of funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- Total Compensation (S.No. 6+7+8+9) Rs.10,57,200/- Less amount awarded by the Tribunal (-) Rs.6,65,000/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.3,92,200/- 11. Accordingly, the compensation amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.3,92,200/-. The rest of the impugned award shall remain intact. The respondents are directed [2026:RJ-JP:15890] (5 of 5) [CMA-1489/2014] to deposit the enhanced amount within a period of two months from today. 12. 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. 13. At this juncture, learned counsel for respondent No. 4 fairly submits that, since respondent No.4 has remarried, she does not wish to claim the enhanced amount, and the same may instead be disbursed to the claimants, who are the parents of the deceased. 14. Accordingly, in view of the above, the entire enhanced amount along with interest is to be disbursed to the claimants herein and the present appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 15. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 16. Registry is directed to send back the record to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J AVINASH GULERIA /26