Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Mosami W/O Bhagchand vs Dashrath Singh S/O Madan Singh … on 16 April, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:16071]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1108/2025
1. Mosami W/o Bhagchand, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Kushalpura
Tehsil Dooni, District Tonk (Rajasthan)
2. Mahaveer Prashad S/o Nanulal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Kushalpura Tehsil Dooni, District Tonk (Rajasthan)
3. Foranta Devi W/o Mahaveer Prashad, Aged About 42 Years, R/
o Kushalpura Tehsil Dooni, District Tonk (Rajasthan)
4. Madhu Kumari D/o Mahaveer Prashad, Aged About 17 Years,
Through Natural Guardian Father Mahaveer Prashad S/o
Nanulal, R/o Kushalpura Tehsil Dooni, District Tonk (Rajasthan)
5. Meena Kumari D/o Mahaveer Prashad, Aged About 15 Years,
Through Natural Guardian Father Mahaveer Prashad S/o
Nanulal, R/o Kushalpura Tehsil Dooni, District Tonk (Rajasthan)
----Appellants
Versus
1. Dashrath Singh S/o Madan Singh, R/o Village Panwad, Tehsil
Devli, District Tonk (Vehicle Driver And Owner Maruti Van No.
Rj-06-Ub-2678)
2. United India Insurance Company Limited, Office Nijam Bidi
Factory, Subhash Bazar, Tonk
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Jyoti Khanna
Ms. Shreya Khandal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA
Order
16/04/2026
1. This appeal has been filed under section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act,
1988 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded, vide judgment
and award dated 19.11.2024, passed by the learned Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Tonk (for short ‘Tribunal’) in MAC Case No.606/2023,
whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants-appellants (for short
‘claimants’) was partly allowed and a total compensation to the tune of
Rs.20,23,140/- was awarded in favour of the claimants, along with
interest @ 7% per annum.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
(Uploaded on 18/04/2026 at 07:36:31 AM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 08:52:34 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:16071] (2 of 3) [CMA-1108/2025]
3. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that on 08.03.2023, at
7 PM, Bhagchand (since deceased) was going from his village to Deoli
on motorcycle and when he reached near Gopalpura, a Maruti Van
bearing registration No.RJ06-UB-2678, being driven by respondent No.1
in a rash and negligent manner, hit the Motorcycle from behind. As a
result of such accident, Bhagchand sustained grievous injuries and later
on he died. Thereafter, a claim petition was filed by the claimants, which
was partly allowed by the learned Tribunal vide impugned judgment and
award.
3.1 Learned counsel for the claimants further submits that the sole
grievance of the claimants is that the learned Tribunal has erred in not
granting compensation under the head of loss of consortium to each of
the claimants. He also submits that in the instant case, the accident
took place in March 2023, hence, an increment @ 10% should also be
made in the amount of compensation towards the said head. He,
therefore, prays that compensation of Rs.44,000/ should be awarded to
each of the claimants separately, for the loss of consortium.
3.2 Learned counsel has relied upon the following judgments passed
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court:-
(i) National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi
reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680.
(ii) Magma General Insurance Company Vs. Nanuram @
Chuhru Ram & Ors. reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance
Company opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the
claimants and submits that the impugned judgment and award passed
by the learned Tribunal is just and reasonable, therefore, no
interference is required by this Court.
(Uploaded on 18/04/2026 at 07:36:31 AM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 08:52:34 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:16071] (3 of 3) [CMA-1108/2025]
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds
substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
claimants that each of the claimants is entitled to get compensation
under the head of loss of consortium.
5.1 Further, as the incident in the present matter is of March 2023,
therefore, an increment @10% shall also be made in the compensation
awarded towards loss of consortium in light of the principles laid down
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra).
5.2 Accordingly, each of the five claimants is entitled to the
compensation of Rs. 44,000/- separately, towards loss of consortium.
As there are five dependents-claimants, the total amount under the
head of loss of consortium would be Rs.2,20,000/- (Rs.44,000/- X 5),
however, the learned Tribunal has awarded a lump sum amount of
Rs.48,000/- only, under the said head.
5.3 Consequently, the compensation towards loss of consortium is
enhanced by Rs.1,72,000/- (Rs.2,20,000/- – Rs.48,000/-).
6. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced amount
within a period of two months from today. The rest of the impugned
award shall remain intact.
7. 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. The amount shall be
disbursed in terms of the award passed by the learned Tribunal.
8. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
9. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SANDEEP TANEJA),J
RAVI KHANDELWAL /48
(Uploaded on 18/04/2026 at 07:36:31 AM)
(Downloaded on 20/04/2026 at 08:52:34 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
