Gujarat High Court
Harendrakumar Ramkishan Pikka vs Shyamkumar Chandulal Panchal on 27 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/28/2019 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 28 of 2019
==========================================================
HARENDRAKUMAR RAMKISHAN PIKKA
Versus
SHYAMKUMAR CHANDULAL PANCHAL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR R G DWIVEDI(6601) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS POOJA H HOTCHANDANI(7765) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MS AMI N BHATT(3372) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 27/01/2025
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 dated 06/10/2018 passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Aux.) Vadodara, in M.A.C.P No. 1949 of 2008, by which the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,39,520/- 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 on 04/09/2008 at about 14.45 hours while appellant was travelling on Motorcycle No. GJ-6-J-2629 along with other pillion rider by driving it, when they reached the place of accident at that time driver of Maruti Van No. GJ-6-X-1345 by driving his vehicle very rashly and negligently and collided with the Motorcycle and accident occurred. In same accident grievous injuries were sustained by Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Tue Jan 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 28 21:45:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/28/2019 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025 undefined the appellant-claimant which resulted into permanent partial disability to the extent of 61% body as whole..
3. The claim petition came to be filed by the present appellants claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- 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.Dwivedi for the appellant - claimant has submitted that the tribunal has committed an error in not properly calculating the amount of prospective income while awarding the just and fair compensation. He has submitted that since the injured was having mobile repairing shop and also selling the mobile phone, the amount under the head of future prospect is required to be enhanced. He would further submitted that so far as the aspect of contributory negligence is concerned, the tribunal has awarded 70% to the claimant which may also be considered to 50% as per the contents of Panchnama of scene of offence.
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, Mr.Bhatt, learned advocate for respondent -
Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Tue Jan 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 28 21:45:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/28/2019 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025 undefined
Insurance Company 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 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 32 years and was doing mobile repairing and selling of mobile work in the electric shop 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.3,500/-. Therefore, it Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Tue Jan 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 28 21:45:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/28/2019 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025 undefined 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, it would come to Rs.5,17,440/- as future loss, which is required to be awarded to the claimants. Now, insofar as the negligence aspect is concerned, the tribunal has awarded 70% negligence to the claimant in causing the road accident which in the opinion of this Court considering the contents of the Panchnama whereby both the offending vehicle are negligent in causing the road accident and therefore it would be considered as 50% and therefore this Court holds 50% liable to both the sides for causing road accident.
11. Therefore, total compensation would be as under, which the claimant/s is/are entitled to get.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future Loss of Income 5,17,440/-
Actual loss of income for six months 21,000/-
Pain shock and suffering 35,000/-
Medical Expenses 1,66,064/-
Attendant and Special Diet 25,000/-
Total 7,64,504/-
Less : 50% Contributory Negligence 3,82,252/-
Total 3,82,252/-
Already awarded by the tribunal 1,39,520/-
Enhanced amount of compensation 2,42,732/-
12. Therefore, I hold that the claimants are entitled to get the total amount of compensation of Rs.3,82,252/- with 9% p.a. Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Tue Jan 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 28 21:45:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/28/2019 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025 undefined 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.
13. For the reasons recorded above, the following order is passed.
14. The present appeal is partly allowed.
14.1 The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount Rs.2,42,732/- with 9% p.a. interest from the date of claim petition till its realization before the concerned Tribunal, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
14.2 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.
14.3 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
14.4 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 Tue Jan 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 28 21:45:22 IST 2025