Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) DISSATISFIED with the compensation awarded under the order dated 27.08.2004, passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 7, Jaipur City, Jaipur, this civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant -claimant (hereinafter 'the claimant') whereby in respect of a claim petition at the instance of the claimant compensation of Rs. 4,54,280/ - in the aggregate along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 02.12.2002 till the date of payment has been awarded.
(2.) COUNSEL for the claimant has submitted that the deceased Rakesh Yadav aged 22 years was admittedly engaged as a constable with the Rajasthan Police on substantive basis and as per Ex -17 his salary was Rs. 4,942/ - p.m. at the time of death in a motor accident of 07.06.2002. Counsel has submitted that the compensation has been determined by the court below wrongly deducting 50% of the income of the deceased as his personal expenses and finding dependency of the claimant to an extent of remainder 50% only. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bilkish Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. : [(2008) 4 SCC 259] has held that where the deceased was 22 years of age and a bachelor, the dependency of his parents ought to have been taken at 2/3rd of his income and not 50%. In this view of the matter, the conclusion of the court below that the claimant was dependant on the deceased Rakesh Yadav, her son, to an extent of 50% of his salary deserves to be rectified by this Court. Counsel further submitted that while determining the compensation, the learned court below has failed to consider the future prospects of the deceased Rakesh Yadav who was holding a government job as a constable with the Rajasthan Police. He submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr. [ : (2013) 9 SCC 65] has held that where a person is less then 40 years and in regular employment, future prospects as 50% of his salary at the time of his death should be reckoned for the purpose of determination of compensation. It was thus submitted that the compensation determined by the court below in its order dated 27.08.2004 is therefore liable to be accordingly enhanced/modified. Mr. V.D. Ghatala, appearing for the respondent -Insurance Company, has submitted that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bilkish (Supra) is inapposite to the facts of the present case. He submits that in the aforesaid case the dependants of a deceased 20 years bachelor were both the parents aged 47 and 42 years respectively. He submitted that in the instant case the dependant of the deceased Rakesh Yadav was only the claimant, his widowed mother as his father had apparently expired. He submitted that in this view of the matter, the dependency of the claimant at 50% of the salary of the deceased ought not to be interfered with as it is an appropriate finding with reference to the facts of the case. Counsel further submitted that even otherwise, the deceased Rakesh Yadav aged 22 years at the time of his death would have most likely married in the near future and that would have entailed the lessening of the dependency of the claimant inasmuch subsequent to his marriage, a substantial amount of the income would have been expanded towards his own up keep and that of his wife. On the issue of future prospects, counsel for the Insurance Company has fairly conceded that in terms of the obtaining state of law where a person is in a regular employment his future prospects have to be taken into consideration and reckoned for the purpose of the determination of just and fair compensation.
(3.) I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order dated 27.08.2004, passed by the court below.;