Gujarat High Court
Rituben Sunil Chandani vs Parasmal Mangilal on 30 January, 2025
Author: Biren Vaishnav
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2017 of 2012
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
RITUBEN SUNIL CHANDANI & ORS.
Versus
PARASMAL MANGILAL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR SUNIL B PARIKH(582) for the Defendant(s) No. 6
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 4,5
UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 30/01/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI)
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellants- original claimants against the judgment and award dated Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025 undefined 14.10.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) & Additional Sessions Court, Vadodara in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.127 of 2003, wherein and whereby, the learned Tribunal has awarded the total amount of Rs.15,93,680/- towards compensation with 7.5% interest.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Hiren M Modi for the appellants-original claimants, learned advocate Mr.Vibhuti Nanavati for respondent No.3 and learned advocate Mr. Sunil B. Parikh for respondent No.6.
3. Brief facts narrated in the present First Appeal are as under:-
3.1 On 24.10.2002, in the morning at about 10.00 to 11.00 a.m., Sunilbhai Lakshman Chandani, was going from Jodhpur to Byara (Rajasthan) in Tata Sumo bearing Registration No.RJ-19-P-7207. When Tata Sumo reached near village Bar, Dist. Pali (Rajasthan) at the time of Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025 undefined overtaking a Trailer, it dashed with Truck bearing registration No. RJ-14-G-8206, coming from opposite direction, being driven by Opponent No.4 in excessive speed. Sunilbhai Lakshman Chandani sustained serious injuries, was taken to the hospital, where he was declared dead.
3.2 The parents, wife and daughter of the deceased filed a claim petition for compensation before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vadodara for Rs.1 crore.
Original Opponent Nos.1, 2 and 4 though served, remained absent. Original Opponent No.3- United India Insurance Company Ltd. appeared and filed Written statement at Ex.33. After considering the oral as well as documentary evidence, learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition by awarding Rs.15,93,680/- with interest @ 7.5% with cost on 14.10.2011 in favour of claimants. 3.3 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025 undefined quantum of compensation, the appellants-original claimants have filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation.
4. Learned advocate for the appellants - claimants submitted that the compensation which has been awarded, is on a lower side looking to the evidence on record. It is submitted that the deceased was aged about 36 years and was serving as a manager in a private company. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal has rightly arrived at the conclusion by holding equal negligence i.e. 50%-50% negligence of both the offending vehicles. 4.1 It is further submitted that however, the learned Tribunal has erred in deducting income tax at 30% without any material. It is submitted that looking to the nature of service and income of the deceased at the time of accident, which is established by the claimants, income tax @ 10% can at the most be deducted from the income of Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025 undefined deceased.
5. Per contra, learned advocates for the respondents - Insurance Company has supported the findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal and submitted that in absence of any material to substantiate the percentage of deduction of income tax, this Court may not disturb the finding arrived at by the learned Tribunal.
6. We have carefully considered the submissions canvassed by the learned advocates for the parties and also considered the materials placed before us. So far as question of negligence is concerned, there is no quarrel by either sides. The only limited question which has been raised by the appellants before us is with regard to the deduction of income tax @ 30% i.e. Rs.5,512/- p.m. On perusal of the impugned award, learned Tribunal has deducted Rs.5,512/- p.m. from income of Rs.18,375/- p.m. and has assessed the total income at Rs.12,863/- p.m. after Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025 undefined deducting tax. Learned advocate for the appellants in his submission has contended that the learned Tribunal has also added percentage of Dearness Allowance while calculating the percentage of income tax. In our opinion, the learned Tribunal has erred in deducing income tax at 30% without any base and substance. The deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses is also required to be modified as claimants are widow, minor daughter, father and mother. Since there are 4 dependents, deduction of ¼ personal expenses would meet the ends of justice. We have also observed that the learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of loss of consortium which the claimants are entitled to in view of the settled law.
7. So far as tax liability is concerned, as per Ex.51, the salary was subjected to tax. In the absence of any material to show that deceased was falling under the slab of income whereby Income Tax @ 30% would be Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025 undefined deducted, it would be in the fitness of things to deduct 10% as income tax from the salary of the deceased.
8. After considering the Panchnama, there is no reason to interfere with the aspect of negligence. The learned Tribunal has not erred in assessing the negligence of both the offending vehicles, and we do not find it appropriate to interfere in the findings of such fact.
9. We hold that the appellants-claimants are entitled to the compensation as mentioned hereinbelow:-
Compensation 1 Dependancy Loss Income Rs. 12,250/-
Prospective income 50% Rs. 6,125/-
Total Rs. 18,375/-
Less-income Tax 10%, Rs. 1,837/-
Total Rs. 16,538/-
Deduction of Towards Rs. 4,135/-
Personal Expenses ¼
Total Rs. 12,403/-
X12
Page 7 of 9
Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
Rs. 1,48,836/-
X 15
Total Rs.22,32,540/-
2. Loss of Consortium
Spouse Rs. 48,400/-
Filial Rs. 96,800/-
Parental Rs. 48,400/-
3. Loss of Estate Rs. 18,150/-
4. Funeral Expenses Rs. 18,150/-
Grant Total Rs.24,62,440/-
- Awarded amount by the Rs.15,93,680/-
Tribunal
Enhanced amount Rs. 8,68,760/-
Rate of interest 7.5%
10. For the reasons recorded above, following order is passed.
10.1 The appellants-original claimants are entitled to enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.8,68,760/- @ 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization from present respondents-Insurance Company. 10.2 The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with interest as Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2017/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025 undefined above within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
10.3 The present First Appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 14.10.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) & Additional Sessions Court, Vadodara in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.127 of 2003, is modified to the aforesaid extent. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Court/Tribunal.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) (D. M. DESAI,J) MANOJ Page 9 of 9 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu Feb 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 06 21:17:23 IST 2025