Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Prem Devi and ors. Vs. Kurcha Ram and ors.

Prem Devi and ors. vs Kurcha Ram and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Feb 21, 2006
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/771000

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Insurance;Motor Vehicles

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - 15,000 as against loss of love and affection.

Key legal issue
Insurance;Motor Vehicles

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Prem Devi and ors.

Respondent

Kurcha Ram and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
III(2006)ACC369

Excerpt

- - 15,000 as against loss of love and affection.k.c. sharma, j.1. through this appeal under section 171 of the motor vehicles act, 1988, the appellants seek to modify the award dated 18.10.1993 passed by the learned judge, motor accident claims tribunal, sikar, whereby the learned judge has awarded a sum of rs. 2,01,600.2. i have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the award sought to be modified. the learned judge, on consideration of evidence and material available on record and having concluded that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of tractor no. deg 1761 by its driver, respondent no. 1 has awarded a sum of rs. 2,01,600 under the various heads, making the respondents liable to pay the award amount to the claimants, jointly and severally.3. a perusal of the award sought to be modified shows that in awarding compensation, the learned judge, after considering the evidence, both ocular and documentary has assessed his gross income at rs. 900 per month at the time of accident and after deducting 1/3rd of income for his personal expenses and having assessed his net income at rs. 600 p.m., applied multiplier of 28, inasmuch the deceased was a teacher and had he survived, he would have worked for 28 years, calculated net contribution of deceased to his dependents at rs. 2,01,600 and after deducting rs. 15,000 already paid to the dependents as interim compensation, awarded a sum of rs. 1,86,600 against the loss of income of deceased to his dependents. that apart, the tribunal has further awarded rs. 15,000 as against loss of love and affection. in my considered view, the learned tribunal in making the aforesaid award has evaluated the evidence in true perspective and, therefore, the award sought to be modified needs no interference.4. consequently, the appeal has no merit and is hereby dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Full Judgment

K.C. Sharma, J.

1. Through this appeal under Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellants seek to modify the award dated 18.10.1993 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar, whereby the learned Judge has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,01,600.

2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the award sought to be modified. The learned Judge, on consideration of evidence and material available on record and having concluded that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of tractor No. DEG 1761 by its driver, respondent No. 1 has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,01,600 under the various heads, making the respondents liable to pay the award amount to the claimants, jointly and severally.

3. A perusal of the award sought to be modified shows that in awarding compensation, the learned Judge, after considering the evidence, both ocular and documentary has assessed his gross income at Rs. 900 per month at the time of accident and after deducting 1/3rd of income for his personal expenses and having assessed his net income at Rs. 600 p.m., applied multiplier of 28, inasmuch the deceased was a teacher and had he survived, he would have worked for 28 years, calculated net contribution of deceased to his dependents at Rs. 2,01,600 and after deducting Rs. 15,000 already paid to the dependents as interim compensation, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,86,600 against the loss of income of deceased to his dependents. That apart, the Tribunal has further awarded Rs. 15,000 as against loss of love and affection. In my considered view, the learned Tribunal in making the aforesaid award has evaluated the evidence in true perspective and, therefore, the award sought to be modified needs no interference.

4. Consequently, the appeal has no merit and is hereby dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial