Gujarat High Court

Rambhaben Gordhanbhai vs Bharatbhai Amrshibhai on 14 December, 2022

Bench: Aniruddha P. Mayee

     C/FA/2663/2017                                JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2663 of 2017


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE                               Sd/-
================================================================
1    Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed                     No
     to see the judgment ?

2    To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                              No

3    Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy                    No
     of the judgment ?

4    Whether this case involves a substantial question                    No
     of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
     of India or any order made thereunder ?

================================================================
                      RAMBHABEN GORDHANBHAI & 2 other(s)
                                   Versus
                       BHARATBHAI AMRSHIBHAI & 2 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MS AMRITA AJMERA(5204) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
================================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE

                               Date : 14/12/2022
                               ORAL JUDGMENT

The present First Appeal impugns the judgment and award

dated 28.4.2017 passed by the 5 th Additional District Court and

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Surendranagar in

M.A.C.Petition No.1 of 2010.

C/FA/2663/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present First Appeal are as

follows:-

2.1 That on 9.8.2009, at about 12:30 p.m. in the afternoon,

the deceased was driving his tractor when the truck driven by

the respondent No.2 dashed against the back side of the tractor,

as it was being driven in a rash and negligent manner. As a

result of the accident, the deceased sustained injuries and

expired. At the time of the accident, the deceased was of 45 years

of age and was hale and hearty. It was claimed that the deceased

was a farmer earning monthly income of Rs.1,00,000/- by doing

agricultural work on his land with latest technology. Accordingly,

the appellants herein who are legal heirs of the deceased

preferred claim petition being M.A.C.Petition No.1 of 2010

claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- against the respondents

along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

2.2 The parties completed their pleadings and on the basis of

the pleadings, the following issues and findings came to be

framed:-

"1. Whether it is proved that the deceased sustained injuries and died due to rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident?

C/FA/2663/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation? If yes, what amount and from whom?

3. What award?

FINDINGS

1. In the affirmative.

2. As per final order.

3. As per final order."

2.3 The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

The learned Tribunal, after perusing the evidence and

considering the contentions raised by the parties, was pleased to

partly allow the claim petition and held that the claimants are

entitled to recover an amount of Rs.4,01,000/- by way of

compensation from the respondents jointly and severally

together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the

date of the petition till the realization. It was further directed

that 70% of the amount of compensation be deposited in the

learned Tribunal and the remaining be apportioned between the

appellants herein in equal proportion.

2.4 Aggrieved, the appellants herein have preferred the present

First Appeal.

3. Ms. Amrita Ajmera, learned advocate for the appellants

C/FA/2663/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

submits that the learned Tribunal erred in granting

compensation on lower side. She submits that the deceased was

a prosperous farmer having about 12 vighas of land and was

doing agricultural work with his own tractor. She further

submits that in support thereof, the appellants had also

produced on record 7/12 extract of the agricultural land. She

submits that even if there was no direct evidence showing the

income of the deceased on record since the widow and her

children could not produce the same, it could be safely assumed

that the deceased was earning a good amount from his

agricultural work. She submits that the learned Tribunal has not

given any cogent reasons for considering the monthly income of

the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month in order to grant

compensation. She submits that even under the Minimum

Wages Act, unskilled labour is entitled to Rs.3,800/- per month

and the learned Tribunal ought to have calculated a fair amount

towards the monthly income. She submits that the claimants are

entitled to enhanced compensation and the impugned judgment

and award be modified accordingly.

4. Per contra, Ms. Kirti Pathak, learned advocate for the

respondent No.3 - insurance company submits that in absence

C/FA/2663/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

of any cogent evidence on record, the learned Tribunal has safely

considered an amount of Rs.3,000/- as monthly income of the

deceased. The said income is adequate and the compensation as

calculated thereon is just and proper. She submits that no

interference is called for in the impugned judgment and award

as no evidence has been brought on record with respect to the

income of the deceased. In the circumstances, she submits that

the impugned judgment and award be upheld.

5. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the

evidence on record.

6. It is admitted that the appellants have only produced 7/12

extract and one tax receipt in support of their case with respect

to the income of the deceased. The said evidence by itself will not

be sufficient enough to calculate the income as claimed i.e.

Rs.1,00,000/- per month. In absence of any cogent evidence on

record, this Court is of the opinion that the income should be

calculated on the basis of minimum wages applicable to the

unskilled worker since the deceased was a farmer. As per the

minimum wages applicable, the monthly income would come to

Rs.3,800/-. However, looking at the fact that the deceased was

C/FA/2663/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

in farming and owning land, the monthly income can be safely

rounded to Rs.4,000/- per month, adding thereto 30% increase,

i.e. Rs.1,200/- per month, the future prospective income can be

safely considered at Rs.5,200/- per month. In view of the ratio

laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma

(Smt) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. [(2009) 6 SCC

121], the multiplier applicable in the present case would be 14,

which has been rightly applied by the learned Tribunal.

7. Accordingly, the appellants herein are entitled to the

following compensation:-

Rs. 5,82,456/- Future loss of income.

[Rs.5,200/-p.m. x 1/3 dependency loss = Rs.3,467/-p.m.x12 years x14 multiplier].

       Rs.        16,500/- Loss to estate.
       Rs.        16,500/- Funeral expenses.
       Rs.      1,32,000/- Consortium. [Rs.44,000 x 3 claimants]
       Rs.      7,47,456/- Total. i.e. Rs.7,47,500/- in round figure.

8. In the circumstances, the appellants are entitled to total

compensation of Rs.7,47,500/-. They are entitled to additional

compensation of Rs.3,46,500/- along with interest at the rate of

6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its

realization. The compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal

of Rs.4,01,000/- at the rate of 7.5% interest per annum is

C/FA/2663/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

confirmed. The impugned order stands modified accordingly. The

compensation amount be disbursed to the appellants after due

verification within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of

this order.

Record & Proceedings of the present case be immediately