Bombay High Court
Amir Gulab Sayyed vs Natha Mahadu Jadhav And Anr on 19 October, 2022
Bench: S. G. Dige
1
749.04FA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 749 OF 2004
Amir Gulab Sayyed
Age : 31 years, Occ : Nil,
R/o Walki, Tq. Ahmednagar,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
. ..APPELLANT
(Original Claimant)
VERSUS
1. Natha Mahadu Jadhav
Age : 44 years, Occ : Driver,
R/o Tarakpur Depot,
S.T. Stand, Nagar Depot.
(Appeal dismissed against
Respondent No.1 vide Registrar's
order dated 10.10.2006)
2. The Maharashtra State Road
Transport Corporation,
(Summons to be served on the
Depot Manager, M.S.R.T.C.
Ahmednagar).
. ..RESPONDENTS
( Original respondents)
...
Advocate for Appellant : Mr.R.K. Temkar
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Manoj Shinde h/f Mr.
M.K. Goyanka
...
CORAM : S.G.DIGE, J.
RESERVED ON : 27.09.2022
PRONOUNCED ON : 19.10.2022
JUDGMENT :
By this appeal, the appellant is seeking
749.04FA
enhancement of compensation.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under :-
On 5th September, 1996 at about 8 a.m. the
appellant (for short, "the claimant") along with brother-in-
law were coming on the bicycle from Kedgaon to
Ahmednagar. When they reached near Kinetic Chowk, one
S.T. Bus bearing No.MH-12-2609 came from opposite site
and gave severe dash to the bicycle of the claimant. Due to
the said dash, the claimant and his brother-in-law sustained
serious injuries. Offence was registered against Bus driver.
3. The claimant filed Claim Petition before the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar (for short,
"the Tribunal") for getting compensation. The Tribunal has
passed the judgment and order, which is under challenge in
this appeal.
4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for
the appellant that the Tribunal has awarded lumsum
compensation of Rs.1,65,000/- when the claimant has
sustained 50% disability. Neither future prospects are
749.04FA
awarded nor multiplier is applied while awarding the
compensation. The compensation awarded under non-
pecuniary heads are on lower side. Hence requested to
allow the appeal.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for
the respondent 2 that the claimant was doing work of
Mason, on that basis the compensation is awarded. While
awarding the compensation, the Tribunal has considered all
the aspects. The Tribunal has passed the well reasoned
order and has granted proper compensation. Hence no
interference is required in it.
6. I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused
the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal.
7. The issue involved in this appeal is
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side.
8. Admittedly, the claimant has sustained 50%
permanent disability due to the said accident. The disability
certificate is at Exhibit-31. The Tribunal has considered the
749.04FA
notional income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month.
The Tribunal has awarded lumsum amount of
Rs.1,65,000/-. In my view, as per the view of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16
SCC 680, the claimant is entitle for 40% future prospects as
he was 25 years of age at the time of accident. No multiplier
is applied while calculating the compensation. As per the
view of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma
(Smt) and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and
another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, in the present case,
the multiplier of 18 is applicable.
9. It appears from the record that the claimant was
admitted in the hospital for 86 days. However, Rs.10,000/-
was given for attendance charges, it should be Rs.30,000/-.
Rs.10,000/- is given for diet, it should be Rs.40,000/-.
Rs.10,000/- is given for pains and suffering, I am
considering it to Rs.50,000/-. The Tribunal has considered
Rs.52,000/- for medical bills, I am considering the same as
it is.
749.04FA
10. In view of the above calculations, the appellant/
claimant is entitle to receive the following compensation :-
Heads Compensation
1. Notional income : Rs. 3,000/- per month
2. Yearly income
Rs.3,000/- X 12 : Rs.36,000/-
3. Future Prospects : Rs.14,400/-
======
Rs.50,400/-
4. Multiplier 18
(Rs.50,400/- X 18) : Rs.9,07,200/-
5. 50% Disability : - Rs.4,53,600
=======
Rs.4,53,600/-
6. Non-pecuniary heads
(a) Attendance charges : Rs. 30,000/-
(admitted for 86 days)
(b) For Diet : Rs. 40,000/-
(c) Pains and Suffering : Rs. 50,000/-
(d) Medical Bills : Rs. 52,000/-
7. Total : Rs.6,25,600/-
The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1,60,000/-
The compensation amount - Rs. 6,25,600/-
as calculated by this Court
==========
Appellant is entitle to enhanced
amount Rs. 4,65,600/-
749.04FA
11. In view of the above, I pass the following
order:-
ORDER
(i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The amount of compensation is enhanced from
Rs.1,60,000/- to Rs.6,25,600/-. The appellant is entitle to
enhanced amount of Rs.4,65,600/- @ 6% from the date of
filing claim petition till realization of amount.
iii) Respondents shall deposit enhanced amount within
six weeks.
(iv) Appellant is permitted to withdraw deposited amount.
(v) The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
[S.G.DIGE]
JUDGE
SGA/-
