Gujarat High Court
Somabhai Rupsingbhai Katara Bhil vs Laxvendrasingh Ajayabsinh Jat on 8 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1348/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1348 of 2013
==========================================================
SOMABHAI RUPSINGBHAI KATARA BHIL & ANR.
Versus
LAXVENDRASINGH AJAYABSINH JAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAKBUL I MANSURI(2694) for the Appellant(s) No. 2
MR V B MALIK(5071) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 08/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present appeal arises from the impugned judgment and award dated 30.11.2012 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Auxiliary), Panchmahals at Godhra in M.A.C.P. No.268 of 1990. Vide the said judgment, owing to the death of a ten year old child, the tribunal was pleased to grant aggregate compensation of Rs.1,54,500/- together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. The opponents, namely the insurance company and the driver and owner of the vehicle - truck, have been held liable, jointly and severally, to pay the said amount of compensation to the original claimants.
2. It appears that the said child was grazing his cattle, when he was hit by a truck, for the truck, allegedly, is said to have initially dashed against a bullock and thereafter, collided with the child, crushing the unfortunate child, Jasvantbhai, aged just ten years.
Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 23:08:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1348/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined
3. Heard learned advocate Mr.Mansuri appearing for the appellants - original claimants. He has submitted that the tribunal has been very stringent in awarding compensation. It was submitted that the aggregate compensation in the original claim petition, has been confined to the claim of Rs.1,54,000/- and therefore, swayed by the said fact, the tribunal has awarded compensation, only to the tune of Rs.1,54,500/- and thereafter, additional amounts under the head of funeral expenses and loss of estate, to the tune of Rs.2,000/- and Rs.2,500/- respectively, has been awarded to the claimants. He has submitted that it was the tribunal's duty, even if the amount prayed under the petition was restricted to Rs.1,54,000/-, to pay an amount, as was just and fair in the facts and circumstances of the case. It was submitted that the Tribunal could have granted a higher compensation then that which has been prayed. He has submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases has held that in case of death of the child, an aggregate lump sum compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- is to be awarded. For the said purpose, he has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Meena Devi vs. Nunu Chand Mahto @ Nemchand Mahto - 2022 (0) AIJEL-SC 69946, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has computed compensation, including future prospects, by taking into account the notional income of the child at Rs.30,000/- and had applied multiplier of 15, thereby taking the sum to be Rs.4,50,000/- and adding thereto a sum of Rs.50,000/- as aggregate of all conventional heads and had thus awarded total compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. Learned advocate for the appellant has also relied on the judgment in the case of Kishan Gopal and another vs. Lala and others - 2014 Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 23:08:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1348/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined (1) SCC 244. In the said judgment, the accident was of the year 1992 and the child was about 10 years who had lost his life owing to a vehicular accident. There, the Court made departure from second schedule of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and accepted the notional income of the child would be of Rs.30,000/- in place of Rs.15,000/- and applying the analogy that the value of rupee had come down drastically since 1994, the notional income of Rs.15,000/- as fixed under the second schedule was not sufficient. Thereafter, calculating the notional income of Rs.30,000/-, the Court had awarded aggregate compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-.
4. Thus, the learned advocate submitted that in the present case also, the aggregate compensation being granted to the child ought to be to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-, taking the fact that the accident happened in the year 1990 and that the intrinsic value of rupee has come down drastically since 1994.
5. As against that learned advocate Mr.Palak Thakkar for the insurance company has vehemently opposed the appeal. He has submitted that when the claim amount itself is restricted to Rs.1,54,000/-, there is no warrant for enhancing the same. He has submitted that even otherwise the compensation is just and fair. He also submitted that assuming that the Court is inclined to enhance the compensation to such sum as deemed appropriate, then for the enhanced compensation, interest may not be awarded at 9% per annum, but to the tune of 7.5% per annum. He thus submitted that the appeal is liable rejected and may accordingly be rejected.
Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 23:08:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1348/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined
6. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties, this Court proceeds to decide the lis in terms appearing hereinafter.
7. The point of determination, arising for the consideration of this Court in the present matter is - Whether the finding on compensation, arrived at by the Tribunal is liable to be interfered? If so, to what extent?
8. Indeed, there is no running away from the fact that the age of the child was 10 years. Moreover, in the deposition at Exhibit 29, the deponent has asserted that the child was earning monthly income of Rs.1500/- and that he was a student undergoing his primary education. It was admitted in the said paragraph that deceased was a brilliant student and that he was very hard working. It was claimed that on the top of the said fact, the deceased was also belonging to OBC community and therefore, in the view of the reservation policies in place, he could have easily become a good officer, earning a decent amount. In the cross-examination, this part of deposition has not been contested at all. Therefore, this Court is inclined to take a view that the child was a brilliant child and that he was very hardworking student. In view of the same, the parameters as prescribed in the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Meena Devi (supra) and Kishan Gopal (supra) are satisfied. Therefore, this Court is also inclined to take a view that the aggregate compensation, as computed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in those cases, is also liable be awarded in the present case. Therefore, the total aggregate compensation shall stand enhanced to sum of Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 23:08:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1348/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined Rs.5,00,000/-. This would include the compensation as well as the compensation liable to be paid under the conventional heads. At this juncture, it may be noted that the interest as has been awarded to the tune of 9% per annum. However, learned advocate for the Insurance Company has submitted that the interest may be awarded at 7.5% per annum to the enhance amount. This Court is not inclined to accept the said submission in as much as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Meena Devi (supra) itself has held that the value of money has drastically gone down. This Court thus believes that for an accident which had occurred in 1990, the compensation is being provided now, in the year 2025. Therefore, there is a reason to believe that the loss occasioned by the death of the unfortunate child is sought to be made good by this Court after a prolonged period of almost 35 years. The family, in the meantime, would have kept undergoing the pain of anguish, which no amount of money can compensate. Owing to sum total of such circumstances, in the present case, it would be just and proper if interest at 9% per annum is maintained by this Court.
9. Accordingly, it is ordered that enhanced amount being the amount of Rs.3,45,500/- [Rs.5,00,000/- less Rs.1,54,500/-], shall bear an interest of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced amount of compensation with 9% per annum interest as early as possible, preferably within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. After deposit of the additional amount of compensation, learned Tribunal is directed to apportion and disburse claim amount amongst Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 23:08:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1348/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined claimants through RTGS, after proper verification. The bank account details shall be furnished by the learned advocate for the claimants to the Nazir Department of the Court concerned. The Court fees payable by the appellant claimants on enhanced compensation be deducted from the said amount and the remaining amount of compensation be disbursed in favour of the appellants claimants on due verification within a period of four weeks.
10. The appeal stands disposed of in terms as aforesaid. Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
(J. L. ODEDRA, J) GAURAV J THAKER Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 23:08:34 IST 2025