Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Naveen Kumar vs Deepak Yadav And Ors … on 17 April, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:16171]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2090/2018
Naveen Kumar S/o Vinod Kumar, age about 19 years, R/o Village
Mehtawas, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar, Rajasthan
----Appellant/Claimant
Versus
1. Deepak Yadav S/o Pohap Singh, R/o Mohalla Manpura,
Behror, P.S. Behror, District Alwar, Rajasthan
(Driver of vehicle HR-66-A-3234)
2. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Ramniwas, R/o H. No. 164, Dohar
Kalan, P.S. Sadar, Narnaul, Tehsil Narnaul, District
Mahendragarh, Haryana (Owner of vehicle HR-66-A-3234)
3. TATA A.I.G. General Insurance Company Limited, through
Manager, Registered Office Pinsula Business Park, Tower
A-15 Floor, Ganpatravo Kadam Marg of Senapati Bapat
Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai (Insurance Company of
vehicle HR-66-A-3234)
----Respondents/Non-claimants
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Brahma Prakash
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chanderdeep Singh Jodha
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA
Judgment
17/04/2026
1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimant
(for short ‘claimant’) under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 against the judgment and award dated 25.01.2018, passed
by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District
& Sessions Judge No.2) Behror, District-Alwar (for short ‘Tribunal’)
in MAC Case No.09/2017 (60/2015) whereby the claim petition
filed by the claimant was partly allowed.
2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the claimant
filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal stating therein
(Uploaded on 20/04/2026 at 02:28:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 04:29:34 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:16171] (2 of 6) [CMA-2090/2018]
that on 27.01.2015, he along with one Krishna Kumar was going
on a motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ02-SN-6873, from
Rathor Chowk, Bahror to New Bus Stand, Bahror. The said
motorcycle was being driven by Krishna Kumar and he was sitting
as a pillion rider. When they reached near Takshashila School, a
Scorpio car bearing registration No. HR-66A-3234, being driven by
respondent No. 1 in rash and negligent manner, hit the motorcycle
from behind, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries.
3. The claim petition filed by the claimant was partly allowed by
the learned Tribunal and a total sum of Rs. 41,000/- along with
interest @7.5% per annum was awarded in favour of the claimant.
4. Being dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award,
this appeal has been preferred by the claimant seeking
enhancement of the compensation so awarded.
5. Learned counsel for the claimant has made the following
submissions:-
i. The learned Tribunal has failed to award compensation
under the head of loss of earning capacity and has simply
awarded Rs.5,000/- on account of injury sustained and
Rs.26,000/- towards the medical bills. It is submitted that
at the time of accident, the claimant was studying in the
course of B.Sc. and was deriving income from agricultural
activities and by selling of milk. Therefore, the claimant is
entitled to compensation towards loss of earning capacity
and the same should be determined on the basis of
minimum wages notified for a skilled worker at the
relevant point of time.
(Uploaded on 20/04/2026 at 02:28:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 04:29:34 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:16171] (3 of 6) [CMA-2090/2018]ii. Considering the age of claimant at the time of accident
i.e. 16 years, while calculating the compensation under
the head of loss of earning capacity, multiplier of 18
should be applied and an addition @ 40% should also be
made in the income of the claimant towards future
prospects.
iii. No amount has been awarded by the learned Tribunal
towards loss of amenities, transportation expenses and
nutritious diet.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has
opposed the submissions made hereinabove by the learned
counsel for the claimant and has submitted that the compensation
awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and fair, and therefore, no
interference is required by this Court.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Nagjibhai
Patel Vs. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari & Anr., Civil Appeal No.
10278/2025, decided on 08.08.2025, while dealing with the case
of injury inflicted upon a minor due to motor accident has held
that in the case of death or permanent disability of a minor,
computation of compensation under the head of loss of income
ought to be made by adopting at least minimum wages payable to
a skilled workman as notified for the relevant period of time by the
State Government. In this regard, relevant para of the said
judgment is reproduced hereunder:-
(Uploaded on 20/04/2026 at 02:28:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 04:29:34 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:16171] (4 of 6) [CMA-2090/2018]
“9. On the aspect of monthly income of the minor
appellant, we are inclined to interfere with the judgment
and order of the Courts below. In the present case, it is
evident that the Courts below have failed to take into
account the monthly income of the appellant while
determining the quantum of compensation. It is now a
well-entrenched and consistently reiterated principle of
law that a minor child who suffers death or permanent
disability in a motor vehicle accident, cannot be placed in
the same category as a non-earning individual for the
purposes of assessing the amount of compensation
because the child was not engaged in gainful employment
at the time of the accident. In such a case, the
computation of compensation under the head of loss of
income ought to be made by adopting, at the very least,
the minimum wages payable to a skilled workman as
notified for the relevant period in the respective State
where the cause of action arises……”
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that
compensation under the head of loss of earning capacity will be
awarded to the claimant and it will be calculated on the basis of
minimum wages notified for a skilled workman for the relevant
period of time. Undisputedly, at the time of accident, minimum
wages notified, in the State of Rajasthan, for a skilled worker were
Rs.217/- per day. Accordingly, the monthly income of the claimant
would amount to Rs.6510/-. As a result thereof, the compensation
for pecuniary loss viz. loss of earning capacity due to injuries
sustained, deserves to be computed cumulatively on the basis of
the aforesaid monthly income.
9. Since, at the time of accident, the age of claimant was 16
years, therefore, in view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company
Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, while
determining the compensation towards loss of earning capacity,
multiplier of 18 will be applied and an addition @ 40% will be
made in the income of the claimant towards future prospects.
(Uploaded on 20/04/2026 at 02:28:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 04:29:34 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:16171] (5 of 6) [CMA-2090/2018]
10. Moreover, the compensation for loss of earning capacity will
be calculated on the basis of permanent disability as determined
by the learned Tribunal i.e. 3%.
11. Further, this Court finds that the claimant incurred medical
expenses of Rs.26,433/- towards injuries sustained by the
claimant, of which medical bills were produced by him before the
learned Tribunal, however, the learned Tribunal has awarded
Rs.26,000/-, towards the same without any just reason, therefore,
it is directed that the claimant shall be entitled to compensation of
Rs.26,433/- towards medical bills.
12. In so far as the last contention raised by the claimant is
concerned, this Court considers it just and proper to award a lump
sum amount of Rs.10,000/- for the loss of amenities,
transportation expenses and nutritious diet.
13. 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.217 x 30 = 6,510/-
2. Annual Income Rs.6,510 x 12
= Rs.78,120/-
3. According to the age of Rs.78,120 x 18
claimant i.e. 16 years, = Rs.14,06,160/-
multiplier 18 to be
applied.
4. Future Prospects Rs.14,06,160 /- +
@ 40% Rs.5,62,464/-
= Rs.19,68,624/-
5. Loss of Earning Capacity Rs.19,68,624/- x 3%
(3% disability) = 59,058/-
6. Medical Expenses Rs.26,433/-
7. Pain & suffering Rs.10,000/-
(as awarded by Tribunal)
8. Loss of Amenities, Rs.10,000/-
(Uploaded on 20/04/2026 at 02:28:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 04:29:34 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:16171] (6 of 6) [CMA-2090/2018]
Transportation Expenses,
Nutritious Diet
Total compensation Rs.1,05,491/-
(S.No.5+6+7+8)
Less amount awarded by Rs.41,000/-
the Tribunal (-)
Enhanced amount of Rs. 64,491/-
compensation
14. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the learned
Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.64,491/-. The rest of the impugned
judgment and award shall remain intact. The respondents are
directed to deposit the enhanced amount within a period of one
months from today.
15. 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. The enhanced amount
shall be disbursed in terms of the award passed by the learned
Tribunal.
16. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
17. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
18. Office is directed to send back the record of the case to the
concerned Tribunal forthwith.
(SANDEEP TANEJA),J
SKS/11
(Uploaded on 20/04/2026 at 02:28:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 04:29:34 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
