# Claimants v. Nirlep Singh and others

- **Citation:** (2007) 3 ILRA 646
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2007-04-24
- **Case number:** First Appeal from order No. 158 of 1997
- **Bench:** Rakesh Sharma
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/claimants-v-nirlep-singh-and-others-41037
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Motor Vehicle Act 1988-Section-173Enhancement of compensation-diseased
a housewife aged about 35 yearscritically injured by tanker in question-
initially awarded Rs.2 Lacs-on recall
application after re-hearing reduced to
Rs.60,000/-held-ridiculous- amount of
compensation
enhanced
to
Rs.1,50,000/-.

Held: Para 11

In view of the facts and circumstances of
the case I am of the view that the
compensation of Rs.60.000/- is too
meager. Once the same Court had come
to the conclusion that Rs.2 lacs should
have been adequate compensation for
the loss of human life, then how
subsequently
the
same
court
has
reduced
the
compensation
to
Rs.60,000/-
is
ridiculous.
No
such
conclusion could be drawn on the same
material, which existed on the date of
earlier judgment and on the date of
subsequent order passed by the Court.
The
findings
are
wholly
erroneous,
unjust and improper.

## Text

646 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2007
adjust with the amount of compensation
to be paid to the claimant, however, such
prayer is allowed. Appeal Dismissed.
---------
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 24.04.2007

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAKESH SHARMA, J.

First Appeal from order No. 158 of 1997

Km. Pusp Lata and others

 ...Claimants-Appellants
Versus
Nirlep Singh and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:
Sri Anant Kumar
Sri Anand Kumar
Sri C.P. Gupta
Sri G.L. Bind

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri N.C. Gupta
Smt. Sarita Singh
Sri K.S. Amist
Sri A.K. Saxena

Motor Vehicle Act 1988-Section-173Enhancement of compensation-diseased
a housewife aged about 35 yearscritically injured by tanker in question-
initially awarded Rs.2 Lacs-on recall
application after re-hearing reduced to
Rs.60,000/-held-ridiculous- amount of
compensation
enhanced
to
Rs.1,50,000/-.

Held: Para 11

In view of the facts and circumstances of
the case I am of the view that the
compensation of Rs.60.000/- is too
meager. Once the same Court had come
to the conclusion that Rs.2 lacs should
have been adequate compensation for
the loss of human life, then how
subsequently
the
same
court
has
reduced
the
compensation
to
Rs.60,000/-
is
ridiculous.
No
such
conclusion could be drawn on the same
material, which existed on the date of
earlier judgment and on the date of
subsequent order passed by the Court.
The
findings
are
wholly
erroneous,
unjust and improper.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Rakesh Sharma, J.)

1. This case was listed on the daily
cause list of 9 April 2007. The list is
being rotated for the last two weeks. The
case has come up for hearing today.
Considering the facts and circumstances
of this case, this Court is of the view that
the litigation, which was initiated in the
year 1989, claiming enhancement of
compensation under the Motor Vehicles
Act, must come to a logical end today
after 18 years. The appeal was filed in the
year 1997 and remained, pending for
disposal in this Court for the last 10 years.

2. Heard learned counsel for the
appellants and perused the record.

3. Under challenge is an order
passed
by
Motor
Accident
Claim
Tribunal, Mizapur dated 22.11.1996 in
Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 39 of
1989 Km. Puspa and others vs. Nirlep
Singh and others.

4. The facts of the case emerging
from the record is that deceased Shrimati
Shanti Devi wife of Prabhakar Pandey,
appellant no. 6, was going on foot on
17.3.1989 on Mirzapur-Pipari road when
the Tanker bearing registration No. URZ
2060, which was being driven rashly and
negligently, hit the woman as a result of
which she was critically injured and when
she was being taken to Railway hospital,
Chopan, she succumbed to her injuries in
3 All] Pusp Lata and others V. Nirlep Singh and others
647
the way. A first Information Report was
lodged and the family members of the
deceased took required legal action.

5. A claim petition was filed seeking
compensation under the Motor Vehicles
Act. Earlier the Tribunal had allowed the
claim petition on 1.2.1991 awarding the
compensation amounting to Rs.2 lacs with
interest. Since this order was exparte, a
recall of the same was sought and
thereafter the Tribunal re-heard the
matter, four issues were framed. Finally
the learned Tribunal awarded only a sum
of Rs.60,000/- as compensation.

6. As per the learned counsel for the
appellant, the learned Tribunal had
illegally and arbitrarily held that the
deceased was simply a housewife and no
one was dependent on her. The husband
of the deceased was in railway service
hence the compensation was reduced
from Rs.2 lacs to a paltry sum of
Rs.60,000/-
in
the
latter
judgment.
According to the appellants, the deceased
Shanti Devi was aged about 35 years, a
young
energetic
women,
who
was
engaged in rearing cattle, helping in
agricultural activities, and earning about
Rs.1500/- per month by selling milk and
other by-products.

7. Once the finding was recorded
that the Tanker No. URZ 2060, which
was duly ensured, was involved in the
accident and the death had occurred
immediately after the accident and the
deceased was an earning member of the
family making substantial contribution to
the income of the family, the learned
Tribunal ought not to have drawn the
conclusion which it has recorded while
deciding the claim petition.

8. Respondents have not come
forward to pursue the case nor any
counter affidavit/objections etc. have been
filed. Notices were duly issued and served
upon the concerned parties and the matter
is pending disposal for the last 10 years.

9. I have heard the learned counsel
for the appellant and also perused the
record. Here is a case where a young lady
aged about 35 years has died as a result of
an accident which occurred at 3.10 P.M.
on 17.3.1989 at Mirzapur-Pipari Road
near Chopan town due to rash and
negligent driving of the tanker. The
appellants have brought it on record as
evidence that she was rearing cattle,
helping in agricultural activities, selling
milk and by-products and was earning
Rs.1500/- per month and thus was
augmenting
the
family
income
substantially. The findings of the learned
Tribunal that generally a woman is not
expected to sell milk are improper and
erroneous. The learned Tribunal lost sight
of the fact that these days women have
become much enterprising. The Amul
Milk Products, which are being used by
most of the people and is one of the
biggest
Cooperative
Society
of
the
country is being run with the help of
lower and middle class rural women in
India. The women of Kheda district in
Gujrat and other adjoining districts of
Gujrat are running this Organization of
repute. It is an example of the hard work
and labour of the women folk of the
villages
of
western
Gujrat,
whose
endeavor and hard work has laid the
foundation stone of an Apex Cooperative
Organization like Amul. Thus the role of
the
women
in
Indian
society
as
homemaker and assisting the man folk in
today work cannot be ignored. Keeping in
view the huge contribution of women in
648 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2007
the welfare of the family that they have
been designated as "GRIH LAXMI". It is
uncontroversial fact that the deceased was
rearing cattle, taking care of five minor
children, managing the family, as her
husband was in employment and her
contribution in augmenting the income of
the family ought not to have been ignored.
The learned Tribunal ignored the fact that
the husband of the deceased Prabhakar
Pandey was employed in railway and it
was but natural for the deceased to look
after the agricultural and other affairs of
the family also.

10. In view of the above the finding
that the deceased was a housewife and her
contribution in the augmentation of the
family income was negligible appears to
be erroneous. Deceased could have earned
Rs.1500/- per month by selling milk and
its by-products. It appears that the finding
is based on conjectures and surmises.

11. In view of the facts and
circumstances of the case I am of the view
that the compensation of Rs.60.000/- is
too meager. Once the same Court had
come to the conclusion that Rs.2 lacs
should have been adequate compensation
for the loss of human life, then how
subsequently the same court has reduced
the compensation to Rs.60,000/- is
ridiculous. No such conclusion could be
drawn on the same material, which
existed on the date of earlier judgment
and on the date of subsequent order
passed by the Court. The findings are
wholly erroneous, unjust and improper.

12. Keeping a mid way, this Court is
of the view that Rs.1,50,000/- should be
adequate compensation in this case.
Accordingly the appeal is allowed and the
judgment and award of the court below is
modified to the extent that the Claimants
shall be entitled to Rs1,50,000/- as
compensation along with Interest at the
rate of 10 per cent per annum. All the
necessary consequences shall follow.
Appeal Allowed.
---------
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 11.10.2007

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE PANKAJ MITHAL, J.

First Appeal No. 207 of 1990

Collector, Varanasi

 ...Defendant/Appellant
Versus.
Dariyao Singh ...Claimant/Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri Shrish Chandra (SC)

Counsel for the Respondent:
Sri R.C. Sinha

Land Acquisition Act 1894- Section-54Enhancement of compensation-reference
Court while enhancing the amount-duty
bound to show the reason for taking
different view-than the view taken by
S.L.O.-even no error in the view taken by
S.L.O.
Noticed
in
the
order-heldreference Court's order cannot sustain.

Held: Para 11

Thus,
in
the
totality
of
the
circumstances, I am of the considered
opinion that the reference court has
erred
in
law
in
enhancing
the
compensation awarded by the SLAO to
the claimant-respondent.
Case law discussed:
2005(6) SCC 454
JT 1992(5) SC 414
JT 1997(4)SC 112
JT 1992(5) SC 402