Gujarat High Court
Geetaben Rohitkumar Muchhala vs Vejaraja Mer(Deleted) on 5 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1295/2009 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1295 of 2009
==========================================================
GEETABEN ROHITKUMAR MUCHHALA
Versus
VEJARAJA MER(DELETED) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TUSHAR L SHETH(3920) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR SHASHIKANT S GADE(1706) for the Defendant(s) No. 5
MS HINA DESAI(1023) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 05/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant - original claimant challenging the judgment and award passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gondal dated 09.03.2007 in M.A.C. Petition No. 429 of 1992, by which the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,23,000/- with 9% interest to the claimants from the date of application till its realization, holding insurance company liable.
2. The brief facts of the case are that accident that while the appellant alongwith other persons were going in the jeep at that time, opponent no.1 came with truck in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the claimant who sustained serious injuries.
3. The claim petition came to be filed by the present Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 00:25:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1295/2009 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined appellants claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- from the respondents wherein the tribunal was considering oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties and submissions made at the bar partly allowed the claim petition by awarding compensation as noted above.
4. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
5. Learned advocate Mr.Sheth for the appellant - claimant has submitted that the tribunal has committed an error in calculating the income criteria as well as the amount of prospective income while awarding the just and fair compensation. He has submitted that since the injured was involved partnership business and has produced the copy of IT return, the income criteria as well as the amount under the head of future prospect is required to be enhanced.
5.1 He has submitted that the compensation is required to be enhanced by modifying the award impugned accordingly and this appeal may be allowed.
6. Per contra, Ms.Desai, learned advocate for respondent No.3 and learned Advocate Mr.Gade for respondent no.5 has submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper. The Tribunal has rightly considered the income of the injured, the age of the injured and the dependency. He has submitted that considering the nature of injury, the tribunal has awarded just and fair compensation and this appeal may be dismissed and no interference be made by Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 00:25:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1295/2009 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined this Court.
7. It is noteworthy to mention that the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which gives paramount importance to the concept of 'just and fair' compensation. It is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the object of providing relief to the victims or their families. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with the concept of 'just compensation' which ought to be determined on the foundation of fairness, reasonableness and equitability. Although such determination can never be arithmetically exact or perfect, an endeavor should be made by the Court to award just and fair compensation irrespective of the amount claimed by the claimants.
8. I have considered the submissions made by the rival parties. I have perused the record and proceedings of the Tribunal. I have gone through the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal. From the record, it transpires that the injured was aged about 30 to 35 years and was involved in the business and produced the IT return and considering the age of the victim, the tribunal ought to have considered the grant of prospective income at 40% while considering the income of victim at Rs.4,500/-. Therefore, it would meet the ends of justice if 40% prospective income is added per month as per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma versus Delhi Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. With the volition of both the parties, the functional disability assessed by the tribunal at 30% is continued to maintain. Thus, the future loss Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 00:25:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1295/2009 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined of income would come to Rs.3,62,880/-, which is required to be awarded to the claimants.
9. To be noted further that considering the nature of injuries sustained by the victim, the amount awarded under the head of PSS and other heads are not disturbed by this Court.
10. Therefore, total compensation would be as under, which the claimant/s is/are entitled to get.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future Loss of Income [Rs.4,500/- + 40% 3,62,880/-
prospective income and 30% thereof
functional disability (x) 12 (x) 16 (multiplier)] Actual loss of income for three months 13,500/-
Pain shock and suffering 15,000/-
Medical Expenses 40,000/-
Attendant and Special Diet 7,500/-
Total 4,38,880/-
Already awarded by the tribunal 2,23,000/-
Enhanced amount of compensation 2,15,880/-
11. Therefore, I hold that the claimants are entitled to get the total amount of compensation of Rs.4,38,880/- with 9% p.a. interest from the date of filing the claim petition till its realisation, which would meet the ends of justice. Rest of the direction(s) of the Tribunal remain same.
12. For the reasons recorded above, the following order is passed.
Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 00:25:16 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1295/2009 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined
13. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant is partly allowed. The opponents are held liable to pay the compensation of enhanced amount of Rs.2,15,880/- with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the petition till its realization. The ratio of composite negligence as held by the tribunal is maintained and the insurance companies are directed to deposit the amount of compensation with interest and costs within six weeks from today as per the ratio decided by the tribunal.
13.1 The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded amount lying in the FDR and/or with the Tribunal, with accrued interest thereon, if any, to the claimants, by account payee cheque / NEFT / RTGS, after proper verification and after following due procedure.
13.2 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
13.3 Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) sompura Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 00:25:16 IST 2025