Gujarat State Road Transport ... vs Kaushallyaben Gauthambhai ...

                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/FA/4653/2009                               JUDGMENT DATED: 13/09/2023

                                                                                    undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4653 of 2009


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
==========================================================

1    Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
     to see the judgment ?

2    To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3    Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
     of the judgment ?

4    Whether this case involves a substantial question
     of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
     of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
     GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION THROUGH
                           Versus
     KAUSHALLYABEN GAUTHAMBHAI MANEKLAL RATHI & 8 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI(5424) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,3,4,5,7,8
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Defendant(s) No. 9
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Defendant(s) No. 9
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2,6
==========================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

                              Date : 13/09/2023

                             ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The appellant Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad has preferred the present appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4653/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/09/2023 undefined

2. The respondents being legal heirs of deceased Gautambhai Rathi who died in a motor vehicular accident had filed claim petition (332 of 2001) before the Tribunal at Ahmedabad. The deceased being occupant of Indica car met with an accident, allegedly caused by the offending bus belongs to the appellant. Learned Tribunal after considering the oral as well as documentary evidence, awarded Rs.10,33,000/- with interest at the rate of 7%, in favour of the respondents claimants. The appellant being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation is before this Court.

3. This Court has heard learned counsel Mr. H.S. Munshaw, Mr. Ankit Bachani and Mr. M.C. Majmudar for the respective parties.

4. Mr. H.S.Munshaw , learned counsel appearing for the appellant assailing the judgement and award, contended that the amount awarded is on higher side and without any acceptable and cogent evidence, the monthly income of the deceased determined arbitrarily and therefore, the amount awarded is excessive and exorbitant which requires reduction by this Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents have supported the findings recorded by the Tribunal and contended that the amount awarded is just, reasonable and equitable and no interference is called for.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, the issue arise for determination is whether award of compensation is excessive, exorbitant and requires reduction.

7. In the facts of the present case, deceased was partner of two rice mills i.e. Rathi Rice Mill and Anapurna Mill and was regularly Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 17:03:23 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4653/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/09/2023 undefined filing the income tax returns. The wife of the deceased has produced the I.T. returns and other supporting documents at Exh.43 to 45 and Exh.52 to show the income of the deceased from the business entity. The Tribunal, while determining the income of the deceased, took into account merely income Rs.1,08,000/-. In other words, Rs.9000/- was considered by the Tribunal. The grievance raised is that the wife of the deceased later on admitted as a partner in the firm and, therefore, as such, there is no loss in the income. This contention does lack merits and cannot be accepted. Even otherwise, she is entitled to take part in the business as a representative of the deceased which does not mean that on account of sad demise of her husband there is no loss as such.

8. For the reasons recorded this Court is of the considered view that the amount of compensation awarded is just, reasonable and equitable. The findings on the issue of income recorded based on the evidence on record which does not require interference by this Court. Consequently, present appeal is dismissed, being devoid of any merits. Decree be drawn accordingly.

(ILESH J. VORA,J) SUDHIR Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 17:03:23 IST 2023