Pratapsinh Rupsinh Baria vs Prakashchandra Nandkishor ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 10098 Guj

      C/FA/1013/2018                             JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1013 of 2018

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA                                   Sd/-
================================================================
1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
      to see the judgment ?                                            NO

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                          NO

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

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

================================================================
                    PRATAPSINH RUPSINH BARIA
                             Versus
           PRAKASHCHANDRA NANDKISHOR PUROHIT & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
G K VAGHANI(7830) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR VC THOMAS(5476) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MS. HINA S RAVAL(7298) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
V G RAVAL(7637) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
================================================================
     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
                       Date : 14/12/2022
                      ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The present appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.) at Panchmahals, Godhra in MACP No.2167 of 2002, wherein and whereby the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.64,000/-.

2. It is mentioned in the appeal that the Tribunal has committed error in not granting any amount towards prospective income and the appellant would be entitled to Rs.1,45,800/-. It is also stated that the appellant

C/FA/1013/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

actually suffered a loss of salary for 7 months due to his 54% disability. It is stated that some persons were also kept as attendants, thus, more amount, under the head of transportation, should have been awarded. Thus, the appeal is filed on the basis that the claimant is not awarded an amount of prospective income as well as an amount of Rs.70,000/- for 7 months for actual loss of salary and further enhanced amount of pain, shock and suffering. Further, it is also stated that the amount awarded towards medical expenses is a meager amount of Rs.45,000/-.

3. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Thomas appearing for the respondent no.2 has submitted that the appeal does not require any interference and the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, is just and proper.

4. I have perused the impugned judgment and award as well as the documents and record and proceedings.

5. The claimant was serving as a Head Teacher in a government school. On 26.01.2001 at about 5:15 p.m. the appellant met with an accident while driving a scooter. Accordingly, he was treated for the injury. He was admitted on 26.01.2001 in the hospital and discharged on 11.02.2001. The Tribunal, after considering the oral as well as the documentary evidence, has awarded an amount of Rs.64,000/- towards compensation. It is the case of the claimant that the prospective income is not at all considered as per the decision of this Court as well as the Apex Court. The Doctor had certified the injury of the claimant at 54% for the left lower limb, however, due to the consent given by the parties and the purshish below Exh.18, the disability was assessed 18% and accordingly,

C/FA/1013/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

the compensation of Rs.15,000/- has been awarded towards pain, shock and suffering.

6. In the considered opinion of this Court, the permanent and partial disability as per the certificate at Exh.24, is only for the lower limb, cannot be extended to entire body and the Tribunal on the basis of purshish given by the respective parties has assessed the same at 18%. However, I am of the considered opinion that the amount of Rs.15,000/- awarded towards pain, shock and suffering is a meager amount and the same is enhanced to Rs.30,000/- looking to the injuries suffered by the appellant and his hospitalization.

7. The Tribunal, while answering the issue no.2 with regard to future/ actual loss of income, has held that at the time of accident, the appellant was serving as Head Teacher and was earning Rs.8,974/- per month. The certificate below Exh.28 is also produced, which is issued by the Principal of Primary School, Rasulpura. Further, the appellant has admitted in cross-examination that his salary was Rs.9,000/- and at present, he is getting the salary of Rs.66,000/-. Thus, the Tribunal has denied the compensation under the head of future/actual loss of income. As per the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court dated 13.06.2011 in First Appeal No.1333 of 2011 and 11.04.2012 in First Appeal No. 705 of 2012, the Tribunal ought to have awarded an enhanced compensation of the prospective income. At the time of accident, the appellant was 32 years of age and as per the evidence on record, he was drawing salary of Rs.9,000/- and thereby counting prospective income of 50%, the same would come to Rs.13,500/- and taking only 18% of the said amount that would come to Rs.2,430/- and multiplying the same with

C/FA/1013/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

12 and 5% increase, the amount would come to Rs.1,45,800/-. Thus, the Tribunal has misdirected itself in not applying the multiplier of 5 in case of the petitioner, who was serving as a teacher, as per the decision of this Court, and hence, the amount of Rs.1,45,800/- was required to be awarded as compensation towards the future loss of income.

8. So far as the claim for medical expenses is concerned, the same is decided on the basis of the bills, which have been produced by the appellant below Exhibits 30, 62, 65, 66 and 71 to 75 and below Exhibits 63, 64, 67 to 70 regarding transportation expenses, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.45,000/- + Rs.4,000/- towards the special diet transportation and etc. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the same is appropriately awarded and the same does not require any interference. However, the amount towards pain, shock and suffering is required to be enhanced from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.30,000/- looking to the nature of injury.

9. Thus, the award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent below:-

Rs.1,45,800 towards the prospective loss of income + the claim towards pain, shock and suffering is Rs.30,000/- instead of Rs.15,000/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition shall be deposited before the Tribunal. After such deposition, the same shall be reimbursed to the appellant- claimant after due verification.

10. The present appeal is partly allowed. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned trial court.

Sd/-

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) ABHISHEK/12