Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation @APPELLANT@Hash Ramnarayan, Babulal And Ors

Vide this order above mentioned five appeals would be disposed of as they have arisen out of the same award dated 3.10.2017, passed by the

Tribunal.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

Claimant Radhabai along with others had filed claim petition seeking compensation on account of death of Shivsingh in the motor-vehicle accident

which had occurred on 15.09.2014. Claimants Tarwar Singh, Manohar Singh, Pratap Singh and Ramnarayan @ Babulal had filed separate claim

petitions seeking compensation on account of injuries suffered by them in the motor-vehicle accident which had occurred on 15.09.2014.

All the claim petitions were clubbed together and were disposed of vide impugned award dated 3.10.2017.

As per the case of the claimants, injured as well as the deceased were traveling in Bolero bearing registration No. MP-04-BC-0949. Deceased as

well as the injured were going towards Mehandipur Balaji for offering prayers. At about 7.00 a.m., when they reached Mahaveer Dhaba, bus bearing

registration No. RJ-17-PA-0265 came from opposite direction and struck against the Bolero. As a result, Shivsingh and others suffered injuries.

Shivsingh died at the spot.

In order to establish the fact that the accident had occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending bus, injured

appeared in the witness box and deposed that the accident had occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the bus driver.

Challan was presented against the driver of the offending bus in the criminal court with regard to the accident-in-question under Sections 279, 337,

338, 304-A Indian Penal Code, 1860. There was no evidence on record to rebut the evidence led by the claimants. Hence, the learned Tribunal rightly

held that the accident had occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the bus driver while driving the offending bus.

So far as, the claim petition filed by Radhabai & Ors. is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/- per month.

Accident had occurred in September 2014. As per the minimum wages fixed by the State at the relevant time, the income of the deceased has rather

been taken on a lower side. Tribunal has rightly applied multiplier of 15 to work out the dependency of the claimants as the age of the deceased was

36 years at the time of the accident.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the Tribunal has erred in deducting one-fourth (1/4th) out of the income of the deceased for his

personal expenses, whereas, keeping in view the relationship of the claimants with the deceased, one-third (1/3rd) of the income was liable to be

deducted for his personal expenses. Tribunal has granted Rs.80,000/- towards loss of consortium and love and affection and Rs.25,000/- towards

funeral expenses. The said amount is on a higher side. Be that as it may, since, compensation has not been granted to the claimants towards future

prospects of the deceased, the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal to the tune of Rs.6,45,000/- does not require any reduction.

So far as, injured Tarwar Singh is concerned, he has been granted compensation to the tune of Rs.4,14,000/-. The said injured had suffered 40%

permanent disability and was aged 20 years at the time of the accident. Tribunal has granted compensation by applying the multiplier of 18 vis-Ã -vis

40% permanent disability suffered by him. Further injured has been granted Rs.42,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.6,000/- towards special diet,

Rs.5,000/- towards hospital expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering. The said amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal does not

require any reduction.

So far as, injured Pratap Singh is concerned, he has been granted compensation to the tune of Rs.84,000/-. The said injured was aged 36 years at the

time of the accident and had suffered permanent disability to the extent of 9%. Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 15 to assess the amount of

compensation vis-Ã -vis disability suffered by him. The said injured has been further granted Rs.7,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.4,000/- towards

special diet, Rs.2,000/-towards hospital expenses and Rs.6,000/- towards pain and suffering. The said amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal

in the facts and circumstances of the present case also does not require any reduction.

So far as, injured Manohar Singh is concerned, he has been granted compensation to the tune of Rs.85,000/-. The said injured was aged 28 years at

the time of the accident and had suffered permanent disability to the extent of 6%. Tribunal while assessing the amount of compensation vis-Ã -vis

permanent disability suffered by him has rightly applied the multiplier of 17. The said injured has been further granted Rs.25,000/- towards medical

expenses, Rs.4,000/-towards special diet, Rs.2,000/- towards hospital expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering. The said amount of

compensation granted by the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the present case also does not require any reduction.

So far as, injured Ramnarayan @ Babulal is concerned, he has been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.74,000/-. The said injured was aged 25

years at the time of the accident and had suffered fracture of his right shoulder and ribs and also suffered simple/grievous injuries. The said injured

had undergone an operation and had remained admitted in the hospital for treatment from 17.09.2014 to 24.09.2014. Keeping in view the facts and

circumstances of the case, Tribunal has awarded, in all, Rs.73,000/- as compensation to the said injured and the said amount of compensation in the

facts and circumstances of the present case also does not require any reduction.

Accordingly, all the appeals are dismissed.