Gujarat High Court
Oriental Insruance Company Ltd vs Rameshbhai Soniyabhai Vilaat on 6 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4332/2018 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4332 of 2018
==========================================================
ORIENTAL INSRUANCE COMPANY LTD
Versus
RAMESHBHAI SONIYABHAI VILAAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR AMIT N PATEL(2749) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 06/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 12.5.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Valsad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.245 o 2013.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Meena for the appellant and learned advocate Mr. Amit Patel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
3. The solitary contention raised in the appeal is that the learned Tribunal committed serious error in taking up income of the deceased to Rs.3000/- per month. He would further submit that the deceased was 15 years 06 months and 08 days old at the time of road accident. There is no any iota of evidence on the record to indicate that he was earning Rs.3000/- per month and in that circumstances, adoption of Rs.3000/- per month as Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 01:49:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4332/2018 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2025 undefined income of the deceased is excessive and exorbitant. The learned Tribunal ought to have taken up Rs.15000/- as notional income and to calculate the compensation u/s 163A of the MV Act as the claim petition was filed under the said provision. Mainly upon above submission, learned advocate Mr. Meena submits to allow this appeal and to recompute the compensation.
4. As against above pleadings, learned advocate Mr. Amit Patel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 made two fold submission. He would further submit that the deceased was coming from poor family and to help his family, the deceased was though minor aging 15 years old, was on a cash job working as labourer in the factory producing and manufacturing ball pens and therefore, there is no error on the part of the learned Tribunal to take up Rs.3000/- as monthly income of the deceased. Secondly, he would submit that in case of Lata Wadhwa And Others Vs. State Of Bihar And Others, 2001 8 SCC 197, the Hon'ble Apex Court in a case which was decided that earlier to the present incident, adopted Rs.3000/- as income in absence of any evidence and therefore, there is no reason not to believe that the deceased was not earning Rs.3000/- on the date of the accident. Upon above submission, he prays to dismiss the First Appeal.
5. What could be noticed from the facts of the case that minor Pravinbhai, on fateful day of the accident, after attending his job work in the factory returning back to his home riding bicycle, was dashed by tempo bearing registration No.GJ 15 X 8714 ridden rashly and negligently at an excessive speed by its driver. The impact of the accident was such that Pravinbhai died on the Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 01:49:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4332/2018 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2025 undefined spot.
6. The parents of the deceased filed application u/s 163A of the MV Act to claim compensation. The learned Tribunal though has not referred to the judgment in case of Lata Wadhwa (supra), but adopted Rs.3000/- per month of the deceased aging 15 years on the date of the accident and granted compensation upon the structure formula in view of judgment of Lata Wadhwa (supra) as well as recent judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Meena Devi Versus Nunu Chand Mahto @ Nemchand Mahto, 2023 (1) SCC 204. Thus, according to this Court, the learned Tribunal has committed no error and the First Appeal deserves fate of dismissal.
7. Resultantly, present First Appeal fails and stands dismissed.
7.1 To be noted that this Court on 21.1.2025 passed order in CA No.1 of 2024 to disburse the amount of compensation as per order passed by the learned Tribunal. However, since the main First Appeal is disposed of, aforestated order dated 21.1.2025 is merged with the present order.
7.2 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.
7.3 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 01:49:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4332/2018 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2025 undefined courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
7.4 Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) SHEKHAR P. BARVE Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 07 01:49:25 IST 2025