Neelam Prakash Jagyasi vs Bharatbhai Vajesinh Zala ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9075 Guj

     C/FA/1485/2008                              JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2022




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1485 of 2008


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
=======================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be
  allowed to see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair
      copy of the judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial
      question of law as to the interpretation of the
      Constitution of India or any order made
      thereunder ?

=======================================
                  NEELAM PRAKASH JAGYASI
                           Versus
     BHARATBHAI VAJESINH ZALA (DELETED) & 1 other(s)
=======================================
Appearance:
MR MTM HAKIM(1190) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK C RAWAL(719) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
=======================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
          PRACHCHHAK

                             Date : 13/10/2022

                              ORAL JUDGMENT

C/FA/1485/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2022

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned

judgment and award dated 26.02.2007 passed by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Vadodara

(hereinafter be referred to "the Tribunal") in M.A.C.P.

No.990 of 1998, the appellant - original claimant has

preferred the present appeal under Section 173 of the

Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

2. Brief facts of the present case are that on 18.08.1997 at

about 1.30 p.m., the accident took place between Matador

bearing registration No.GJ-6-T-8802 and S.T. Bus bearing

registration No.GJ-18-V-1749 near Sant Road on the Dahod

- Godhra Road. On the day of the accident, the deceased

Govind Jagyasi was going from Baroda via Godhra to

Dahod by driving the Matador and Prakash Udhavdar was

travelling in the said Matador, which was driven by the

deceased and when they reached on Sant Road at that

time the said S. T. Bus came from opposite direction in

rash and negligent manner and in excessive speed dashed

with the Matador, as a result of which, deceased Govind

C/FA/1485/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2022

Jagyasi sustained fatal injuries and Prakash Udhavdar

sustained serious injuries. Hence, the claimant has filed

the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-.

The Tribunal, after evaluating the evidence on record,

partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of

Rs.20,000/- as damage caused to the Matador.

3. Heard Mr.Mohsin Hakim, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant and Mr.Hardik Rawal, learned counsel

appearing for respondent no.1 - Corporation.

4. Mr.Hakim, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has

submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error while

awarding a sum of Rs.20,000/- as damage caused to the

Matador against the claim of Rs.1,50,000/-. He has

submitted that the Tribunal has not considered the loss

caused to the Matador as per the survey report at Exhibit

20. He has submitted that the appeal deserves to be

allowed and the impugned judgment and order deserves

to be modified.

C/FA/1485/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2022

5. Mr.Rawal, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2

- Corporation has supported the impugned judgment and

award and submitted that the Tribunal has not committed

any error while passing the impugned judgment and

award. He has submitted that the appeal being meritless

deserves to be dismissed.

6. Having considered the facts of the case and perused the

record and proceedings, it is found that the R.C. Book at

Exhibit 22 which suggests that the Matador was of the

year 1989 and it was purchased by the original claimant in

the year 1996. Considering the photographs at Exhibit 29,

survey report at Exhibit 30 and RTO certificate at Exhibit

33 and 38 issued by the concerned RTO office, I am of the

opinion that the Tribunal has committed an error by

awarding Rs.20,000/- towards damage of the Matador to

the claimant and, therefore, the impugned judgment and

award deserves to be modified. The amount of Rs.20,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal is very meager and if this Court

considers depreciation of the vehicle for every year i.e.

C/FA/1485/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2022

from 1989 to 1997, then also, the impugned judgment and

award is required to be modified to the extent.

7. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed in part. The

judgment and award dated 26.02.2007 passed by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is hereby modified and in

addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal, a sum

of Rs.50,000/- as additional amount with interest at the

rate of 6% per annum is awarded which shall be from the

date of filing claim petition till its realization. The

respondent no.2 - Corporation is directed to deposit

additional amount of compensation with 6% interest as

early as possible within an outer limit of eight weeks from

the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. After

deposit of the additional amount of compensation, the

same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant through

RTGS, after proper verification. The bank account details

shall be furnished by the learned advocate for the

claimant to the Nazir Department of the Court concerned.

The appellant is directed to pay deficit court fees, if any,

C/FA/1485/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2022

on the enhanced amount within one month from the date

of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Record and proceedings be sent back to the

concerned Tribunal forthwith. Pending civil applications, if

any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) V.R. PANCHAL