✦ High Court of India · 25 Sep 2025

National Insurance Co v. Pranay Sethi Ors

Case Details High Court of India · 25 Sep 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
25 Sep 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,184 words

Cited in this judgment

Ma. Naveen S/o Late Shri Rajveer Singh, Aged 15 Years, (Son Of Deceased) (Appellant No. 2 & 3 are Minor Through Natural Guardian And Mother Mrs. Manoj Devi)

4. Shanti Devi W/o Shri Manroop Singh, Aged 73 Years, (Mother of Deceased)

5. Manroop Singh S/o Late Shri Likhmaram, Aged 78 Years, (Father of Deceased) All R/o Ward No.- 4, Gram Seethal, District Jhunjhunu, (Raj.) ----Appellants/Claimants Versus

1. Mahipal Maan S/o Shri Badri Singh Maan, R/o- 30, Manawali Dhani, Gram- Murlipura, Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur, (Raj.) 303103 (Pick Up Driver Vehicle No. RJ-23-GB-9637)

2. Mahendra Kumar S/o Shri Bhagirath Ram, R/o Ward No.-13, Village Khandela, Ladpura, District Sikar, (Raj.) 332001 (Pick Up Driver Vehicle No. RJ-23-GB-9637)

3. United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Manager Office- Jangid Building, M.I. Road, Police Station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur-302001 Policy No. 1403013120P103648580 Valid Date 11.07.2020 To

10.07.2021 (Insurance Company Vehicle No. RJ-23-GB-9637) ----Respondents/Non-Claimants For Appellant(s) : Mr. Bhanu Prakash Verma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vimal Kumar, Adv. For Mr. Rishipal Agarwal, Adv. [2025:RJ-JP:40065] (2 of 5) [CMA-2417/2023] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI 25/09/2025 Order vihykFkhZx.k dh vksj ls ;g vihy fo}ku U;k;ky; eksVj nq?kZVuk nkok U;k;kf/kdj.k] t;iqj 'kgj t;iqj }kjk Dyse ;kfpdk la[;k 99@2023 ¼251@2021½ esa ikfjr fu.kZ; o vokMZ fnukad 12-05-2023 ls O;fFkr gksdj izLrqr dh x;h gS] ftlds ek/;e ls fo}ku vf/kdj.k us vihykFkhZx.k dks dqy 13]35]650@& :i;s izfrdj jkf'k rFkk mDr jkf'k ij ;kfpdk izLrqr djus dh fnukad 19-04-2021 ls olwyh rd 6 izfr'kr lk/kkj.k okf"kZd C;kt dh nj ls C;kt fnyok;k gSA chek daiuh rFkk okgu Lokeh@pkyd dh vksj ls dksbZ vihy izLrqr ugha dh x;h gSA vihykFkhZx.k ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd dk cgl ds nkSjku ;g lhfer rdZ jgk gS fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k us izse] Lusg o okRlY; ds en esa dsoy 2]00]000@& :i;s gh fnyok;s gSa] tcfd fof/kd izko/kkuksa ds vuq:i izR;sd vihykFkhZ dks 48]400@& :i;s dalksfVZ;e dh gkfu ds en esa fnyok;s tkus pkfg, FksA blh izdkj vafre laLdkj o lEink dh gkfu ds enksa esa Hkh fo}ku vf/kdj.k us de izfrdj jkf'k fnyok;h gSA vr% izfrdj jkf'k esa fof/k vuqlkj o`f) fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA izR;FkhZ&chek daiuh ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd dk cgl ds nkSjku rdZ jgk gS fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k us fof/kd izko/kkuksa ds rgr vihykFkhZx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr ekSf[kd ,oa nLrkosth lk{; ds lexz fo'ys"k.k ds mijkar lgh :i ls vkyksP; fu.kZ; o vokMZ ikfjr fd;k gS] ftlesa gLr{ksi fd;s tkus dh dksbZ vko';drk ugha gS] vr% vihykFkhZx.k dh vihy [kkfjt dh tkosA [2025:RJ-JP:40065] (3 of 5) [CMA-2417/2023] eSaus mHk; i{k ds rdksZa ij euu fd;k rFkk i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;kA orZeku izdj.k esa fnukad 03-03-2021 dks e`rd jktohj flag vius ppsjs HkkbZ iou dqekj ds lkFk xkao vk jgk Fkk] rc le; yxHkx 7%30 ih-,e- ij xzke lhaFky cl LVS.M ds ikl fidvi uacj RJ 23 GB 9637 dk pkyd rst xfr o ykijokgh ls fidvi pykdj yk;k vkSj jktohj ds VDdj ekj nh] ftlls nq?kZVuk esa vk;h pksVksa ds dkj.k mldh e`R;q gks x;hA rRi'pkr vihykFkhZx.k }kjk fo}ku vf/kdj.k ds le{k Dyse ;kfpdk izLrqr dh x;hA fo}ku vf/kdj.k us vius vkyksP; fu.kZ; esa vk; gkfu ds en esa tks jkf'k vo/kkfjr dh gS] mlesaa nksuksa i{kksa ds e/; dksbZ fookn ugha gSA tgka rd ijEijkxr 'kh"kZd esa izfrdj jkf'k dk iz'u gS] National Insurance Co. Vs Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680 fofu'p; esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "54. ........................ It seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively. The principle of revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But the revisit should not be fact-centric or quantum-centric. We think that it would be condign that the amount that we have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis in every three years and the enhancement should be at the rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are 41 disposed to hold so because that will bring in consistency in respect of those heads." mDr fofu'p; ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk fnukad 31-10-2017 dks ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA mlds i'pkr Sadhana Tomar & Ors. Vs. Ashok [2025:RJ-JP:40065] (4 of 5) [CMA-2417/2023] Kushwaha & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 3763/2025 fofu'p; esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk fnukad 24-01-2025 dks iz.k; lsBh ¼iwoksZDr½ ds fu.kZ; ds vuq:i fu.kZ; ikfjr dj nq?kZVuk ds i'pkr dalksfVZ;e dh gkfu] lEink dh gkfu o vafre laLdkj ds enksa esa izR;sd rhu o"kZ i'pkr 10 izfr'kr dh o`f) dh x;h gSA blh izdkj dk er ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk Kavita Devi & Others Vs. Sunil Kumar & Another 2025 INSC 938 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; esa O;Dr fd;k gSA mDr fu.kZ; ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & ors., 2018 (18) SCC 130 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fl)akrksa ds vuq:i fd;k x;k gS] ftlesa dalksfVZ;e] izse&Lusg dks foLr`r :i ls foosfpr djrs gq, eksVj okgu vf/kfu;e dks ykHknk;d o dY;k.kdkjh fof/k gksuk crkrs gq, mfpr izfrdj fu/kkZj.k ds laca/k esa er O;Dr fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa bl izdj.k esa Hkh dalksfVZ;e dh gkfu] lEink dh gkfu o vafre laLdkj ds enksa esa iz.k; lsBh ¼iwoksZDr½ ds fu.kZ; fnukad 31-10-2017 ds vuq:i izR;sd rhu o"kZ esa 10 izfr'kr dh o`f) dk ykHk fn;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr izrhr gksrk gSA ,sls esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk mDr U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fl)karksa ds vuqlkj dalksfVZ;e gkfu ds en esa vihykFkhZx.k] izR;sd 48]400@& :i;s vFkkZr~ dqy 2]42]000@& :i;s rFkk vafre laLdkj ds en esa 18]150@& :i;s rFkk lEink dh gkfu ds en esa Hkh 18]150@& :i;s vFkkZr mDr enksa esa dqy 2]78]300@& :i;s izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSa] tcfd vf/kdj.k us mDr enksa esa dsoy 2]30]000@& :i;s gh fnyk;s x;s gSaA vr% mDr enksa esa dqy 48]300@& :i;s c<+ksrjh ;ksX; gSaA [2025:RJ-JP:40065] (5 of 5) [CMA-2417/2023] bl izdkj fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk tks izfrdj jkf'k fnyk;h x;h gS] mlesa c<+ksrjh djrs gq, vihykFkhZx.k@nkosnkjku dqy 48]300@& :i;s vfrfjDr :i ls izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSaA mijksDr foospukuqlkj ;g vihy vkaf'kd :i ls Lohdkj dj fo}ku U;k;ky; eksVj nq?kZVuk nkok U;k;kf/kdj.k] t;iqj 'kgj t;iqj }kjk Dyse ;kfpdk la[;k 99@2023 ¼251@2021½ esa ikfjr fu.kZ; o vokMZ fnukad 12-05-2023 dks mikUrfjr djrs gq, vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd fo}ku vf/kdj.k }kjk tks izfrdj jkf'k vihykFkhZx.k dks fnyok;h x;h gS] mlds vfrfjDr vihykFkhZx.k 48]300@& :i;s izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gksaxs rFkk vihykFkhZx.k mDr c<+h gqbZ jkf'k ij fo}ku vf/kdj.k ds le{k ;kfpdk izLrqr djus dh fnukad ls olwyh dh fnukad rd 07 izfr'kr okf"kZd lk/kkj.k C;kt nj ls C;kt Hkh izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gksaxsA vihyk/khu vkns'k dh 'ks"k 'krsaZ ;Fkkor jgsaxhA layXu izkFkZuk i=] ;fn dksbZ gksa] mDrkuqlkj fuLrkfjr fd;s tkrs gSaA fo}ku vf/kdj.k dk vfHkys[k ;fn bl U;k;ky; dks izkIr gks j[kk gS] rks bl vkns'k dh izfr ds lkFk ykSVk;k tkosA (CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J MANISH SAINI /70

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments