Gujarat High Court

Naranbhai Devdanbhai Dangar ... vs Virjibhai Kanjibhai Dabhi on 11 October, 2022

Bench: Hemant M. Prachchhak

     C/FA/3437/2011                                 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/10/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3437 of 2011


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK                              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 ?

==========================================================
    NARANBHAI DEVDANBHAI DANGAR SINCE DECD. THROUGH HEIRS
                              Versus
               VIRJIBHAI KANJIBHAI DABHI & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PANKAJ R DESAI(3120) for the Appellant(s) No.
1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,1.8,1.9
MR CHETAN P PANDYA(2590) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR SANDIP C SHAH(792) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
          PRACHCHHAK

                              Date : 11/10/2022

                             ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the

C/FA/3437/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/10/2022

impugned judgment and award dated 14.7.2011 passed

by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi)

Morbi, in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.114 of 2011,

the appellants have preferred present appeal for

enhancement of the compensation amount.

2. The short facts giving rise to present appeal are as

under:-

2.1 It is the case of the applicant-appellant that on

12.05.2009 at 05.30 to 05.45 PM approximately the decd.

Naranbhai Devdanbhai Dangar was proceeding from

Morbi to Rajkot as a passenger in Mini Bus No. GJ-11T-

1915. At that time, when the above mention bus was

passing through Barad to Sarvad in Maliya Taluka at

about 5.30 to 5.45 PM, the driver of above mentioned

vehicle was driving the bus in full speed and rashly and

negligently and because of that the driver loss the control

over the said bus No. GJ-117-1915 and the bus turtled

down and the deceased Naranbhai Devdanbhai Dangar

sustained serious injuries and was immediately removed

C/FA/3437/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/10/2022

to Prabhat Hospital at Morbi. But as the injuries was very

serious the family members of deceased were advised to

remove the deceased at Wockhardt Hospital, Rajkot and

therefore he was admitted in Wockhardt Hospital as an

Indoor Patient but he died on 14.05.2009 during

treatment at Rajkot due to injuries sustained in the

vehicular accident on 12.05.2009.

2.2 Therefore the heirs of the deceased had filed Motor

Accident Claims Petition No.114 of 2011 before the

learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi) Morbi.

2.3 The Tribunal after evaluating the evidence placed on

record, has passed the impugned award dated 14.07.2011

and awarded compensation of Rs.3,93,800/- to the

appellant.

2.4 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the above

judgment and award the appellants have preferred

present appeal for enhancement.

C/FA/3437/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/10/2022

3. I have heard Mr. Hemal Shah, learned advocate

appearing for Mr. Pankaj Desai, learned advocate for the

appellants and Mr. Sandip Shah, learned advocate

appearing for the respondent insurance company. Though

the rule served to the respondent No.1, no one is present

for respondent No.1 at the time of hearing of present

appeal. With the consent of the learned advocates

appearing for the respective parties, the present appeal is

taken up for final hearing today.

4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that

the learned Tribunal has committed an error in allwoing

the claim application of the appellants in part which is

improper and against the documentary evidence

produced on record. He submitted that the claim is

required to be enhanced.

5. On the other hand, learned advocate for the

respondent insurance company submitted that the

learned Tribunal has taken into account all relevant

aspects and after evaluating the evidence on record,

C/FA/3437/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/10/2022

passed the impugned award and therefore, learned

Tribunal has not committed any error in passing the

impugned judgment and award. He submitted that the

impugned judgment and award may not be interfered

with and present appeal may be dismissed.

6. Considering the fact that the deceased was aged 43

years and agriculturist as well as driving work and

considering the recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court

in case of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi

Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC

121 and National Insurance Company Limited Vs.

Pranay Sethi and others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, it is

appropriate to grant the just and adequate compensation

to the present appellants and present appeal requires to

be allowed in part to that extent.

7. Considering the fact that 9 persons are dependent

on the deceased. Further out of 9 persons, 4 are minor

children and wife who are also entitled to get consortium

as per the settled legal position laid down by the Hon'ble

C/FA/3437/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/10/2022

Apex Court in cases of Magma General Insurance

Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram

and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, United India

Insurance Company Limited Vs. Satinder Kaur alias

Satwinder Kaur and others, AIR 2020 SC 3076 and

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Somwati and

others, (2020) 9 SCC 644.

8. Hence, in view of the aforesaid discussions, the

present appellants are entitled for the enhanced

compensation as below:-

                Rs.3,000/-                 Income
       +        Rs. 750/-                  Prospective Income
                --------------
                Rs. 3,750/-
       -        Rs.     750/-              1/5 Deduction
                --------------
                Rs. 3,000/-
       x                 12                Months
                --------------
                Rs. 36,000/-
       x                   14              Multiplier
                --------------
                Rs. 5,04,000/-
       +        Rs. 2,000,00/-             Loss of consortium (5
                                           dependents)
                ----------------
                Rs. 7,04,000/-
       +        Rs. 30,000/-               Loss of Estate and
                                           Funeral





      C/FA/3437/2011                                      JUDGMENT DATED: 11/10/2022




                ---------------
                Rs. 7,34,000/-
       -        Rs. 3,93,800/-               Awarded by the Tribunal
                -------------------
                Rs. 3,40,200/-               Enhanced compensation.

9. Hence, in view of the aforesaid discussion, the

appellants are entitled to receive the enhanced

compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,40,200/- with 6%

interest from the date of application till realization.

10. Therefore, the present appeal is allowed in part and

the impugned judgment and award dated 14.7.2011

passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

(Auxi) Morbi, in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.114 of

2011, is hereby modified to the aforesaid extent.

11. The insurance company is hereby directed to deposit

the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 3,40,200/-

with 6% interest within period 8 weeks from the date of