Gujarat High Court

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Ranjanben Vilasbhai Jadav on 18 October, 2022

Bench: Hemant M. Prachchhak

     C/FA/4541/2007                                  JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                         R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4541 of 2007
                                      With
                        R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 36 of 2017
                                       In
                          FIRST APPEAL NO. 4541 of 2007

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 ?

==========================================================
                          ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
                                     Versus
                      RANJANBEN VILASBHAI JADAV & 8 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 8
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Defendant(s) No. 9
MR AMIT V THAKKAR(3073) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
==========================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
          PRACHCHHAK

                                 Date : 18/10/2022

                                ORAL JUDGMENT

C/FA/4541/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the

impugned judgment and award dated 14.3.2007 passed

by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.),

Fast Track Court No.6, Surat in Motor Accident Claims

Petition No.754 of 1997, the appellant insurance company

has preferred present first appeal on the ground that the

compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on a

higher side.

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

under:-

2.1 On 12.9.1997 the original claimants have proceeded

on Chalthan National Highway No.8 on Rajdoot

Motorcycle bearing registration No.GJ-5-M-3549. At that

time, one Truck bearing registration No. GJ-15-X-1909

came in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the

Motorcycle and due to this accident one Mr. Vilasbhai had

sustained serious injuries and succumbed.

2.2 The claimants / legal heirs of the deceased have

therefore preferred claim petition before the learned

C/FA/4541/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Fast Track Court

No.6, Surat being Motor Accident Claims Petition No.754

of 1997 for the compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. Learned

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal after evaluating the

evidence placed on record passed judgment and order

dated 14.03.2007 and partly allowed the said claim

petition and awarded the compensation to the tune of

Rs.5,67,000/- to the original claimants. Therefore,

appellant - insurance company has preferred present

First Appeal on the ground that the compensation

awarded by the learned Tribunal is on higher side.

3. I have heard Mr. Rathin P. Raval, learned advocate

appearing for the appellant-insurance company and Mr.

Paresh M. Darji, , learned advocate for Mr. Amit Takkar,

learned advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to

7. Respondent No.8 came to be deleted. With the consent

of the learned advocates appearing for the respective

parties, the present appeal is taken up for final hearing

today.

C/FA/4541/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022

4. So far as the contention raised by the learned Counsel

for the appellant Mr. Raval, to the effect of negligency

considered by the learned Tribunal is concerned, I am not

satisfied with the submission made by Mr. Raval, learned

advocate for the appellant. Therefore, the appeal of the

present appellant is not entertained on the ground of

negligence.

5. I have also perused the Panchnama of the place of

accident. The learned Tribunal has rightly come to the

final conclusion and after appreciating the evidence on

record has passed the impugned judgment and order.

6. So far as the multiplier is concerned, looking to the

facts and circumstances of the case, the multiplier

applied by the Tribunal is on higher side which is

required to be reduced. The multiplier applied by the

tribunal is 17 which is higher side and the same is hereby

modified to 16. Hence, so far as the multiplier is

concerned, the impugned judgment and award passed by

the learned Tribunal deserves to be modified to that

C/FA/4541/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022

extent.

7. So far as the second contention on the part of the

appellant with regard to the income is concerned, the

learned Tribunal has considered the income of the

deceased as Rs. 4000/-. Though it is an admitted fact that

the income of the deceased was Rs. 3920/-. Hence, the

income part of Rs.4000/- is hereby modified to Rs.3920/-.

Hence, the said contention is also considered in

affirmative.

8. Therefore, present first appeal succeeds qua this

two contentions i.e. income of the deceased and the

multiplier.

9. So far as the cross objection field on behalf of the

original claimants is concerned, the said cross objections

requires to be modified to the extent that the appellants

the original claimants - opponents herein, who have filed

the cross objections are entitled to receive Rs.6,31,168/-

in addition to the amount which is awarded by the

learned tribunal i.e. Rs.5,67,000/- with 6% interest from

C/FA/4541/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022

the date of application till realization.

10. 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 original claimants.

11. In addition to that the original claimants are also

entitled to get consortium as per the settled legal position

laid down by the Hon'ble 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.

12. Therefore, in my view, the claimants are entitled for

the following compensation:

C/FA/4541/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022

Rs. 3,920 (salary) + Rs. 1,960 (prospective 50%)

--------------

  =     Rs. 5,680
  -     Rs. 1,176                 Personal expenses 1/5
        --------------
               4,704
  x                12             (Month)
        ----------------
  =     Rs. 56,448
  x                  16           (multiplier)
        ------------------
  =     Rs. 9,03,168              Dependency
  +     Rs.      15,000           Loss of Estate
        -------------------
        Rs. 9,18,168
  +     Rs. 2,00,000              Consortium (40,000 x 5)
        --------------------
        Rs. 11,18,168
  +     Rs.        80,000         Parental consortium.
        --------------------
        Rs. 11,98,168
  -     Rs. 5,67,000              Awarded by the Tribunal
        --------------------
        Rs. 6,31,168.00           Enhanced Compensation for
                           claimants.

13. Accordingly the appeal filed by the insurance

company is hereby partly allowed qua the multiplier and

the income of the deceased.

14. So far as the cross objection filed by the claimants is

concerned, the same is allowed to the extent at they are

entitled for the compensation towards different heads i.e.

the prospective loss of income and the consortium.

C/FA/4541/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/10/2022

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

claimants are entitled to receive the enhanced amount of

compensation to the tune of Rs. 6,31,168/- with 6%

interest from the date of application till realization.