Gujarat High Court
Hussainabibi Firozkhan Pathan ... vs Mukesh Arvindbhai Brahmbhatt on 31 March, 2021
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
C/FA/862/2010 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 862 of 2010
==========================================================
HUSSAINABIBI FIROZKHAN PATHAN LEGAL HEIRS OF DECD.FIROZKHAN
Versus
MUKESH ARVINDBHAI BRAHMBHATT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MTM HAKIM(1190) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HAMESH C NAIDU(5335) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED(64) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 31/03/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation of
Rs.46,675/-, awarded by the Tribunal (Vadodara), in MACP
No.1782/1993, the original claimant - appellant has filed the
present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
seeking enhancement of the compensation.
2. Heard Mr. MTM Hakim, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant-original claimant and Mr. Hamesh Naidu, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent No.2 - National Insurance Company
Ltd.
3. Mr. Hakim, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that,
the learned Tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier of 5 while
computing the amount under the head of future economic loss. In
this context, he pointed out that, accident in question took place
C/FA/862/2010 ORDER
on 31.05.1993 and during the pendency of claim proceedings, the
injured died on 19.08.2005 and accordingly, the learned Tribunal
after considering disablement to the extent of 23 %, had awarded
the amount of Rs.27,600/- under the head of future economic loss.
(monthly income at Rs.24,000/- X 23 % = Rs.5,520/- X 5 =
Rs.27,600/-). In this circumstances, the learned counsel would
submit that, the learned Tribunal ought to have adopted multiplier
of 12 considering the age of the deceased.
4. Learned counsel Mr. Hakim does not press the other issues like
contributory negligence determined to the extent of 25 %
attributable to the deceased injured and the amount awarded
under the different heads by the learned Tribunal.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Hamesh Naidu, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company supported the judgment and award passed by
the Tribunal contending that, the discretion exercised by the
learned Tribunal while awarding the amount under the head of
future economic loss is just and proper and considering the facts
of the present case, the appellant failed to make out the case for
enhancement of the amount under the head of future economic
loss.
6. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties and considering the record and proceedings of
the case, it appears that, the original claimant Firozkhan Chauhan
had sustained injuries in a vehicular accident which took place on
C/FA/862/2010 ORDER
31.05.1993. It is an undisputed fact that, at the time of filing the
claim petition, age of the injured was 44 years old and he died at
the age of 56 years during the proceedings of the claim petition.
The only issue raised in the present appeal is with regard to
amount of compensation awarded under the head of future
economic loss, wherein, the ld. Tribunal thought it fit to apply
multiplier of 5 while computing the total amount towards future
economic loss. The findings regarding application of multiplier of 5
is erroneous as the ld. Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that,
after the accident, deceased was alive for 12 years. Had the
tribunal considered this aspect of 12 years, then, the Tribunal
would have applied the multiplier of 12 instead of 5. In this
backdrop, the amount awarded under the head of future economic
loss needs to be enhanced as under:
Rs.24,000/- X 23 % = Rs.5,524/- X 12 = 66,240/- - 25 %
contributory negligence = Rs.49,680/- - Rs.27,600/- (the
amount which has already been awarded) = Rs.22,080/-.
7. In view of the above, the appellant is entitled to get enhanced
amount of Rs.22,080/- under the head of future economic loss and
respondent Nos.1 and 2 held liable to pay with interest @ 7.5 % p.a.
from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization of the
amount. The award be modified accordingly. Except the above
modification, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal
under the different heads remains unchanged.
8. For the foregoing discussions, the appeal stands allowed in the
C/FA/862/2010 ORDER
aforesaid terms, by enhancing the total compensation awarded by
the Tribunal from Rs.46,675/- to Rs.68,755/-. Respondent No.2 -
Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced amount along with
the interest before the Tribunal within a period of two months
from the date of receipt of this order and the Tribunal shall
disburse the enhanced amount in cash to the appellant. Record
and proceedings, if any, be remitted back to the learned Tribunal.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
P.S. JOSHI
