Gujarat High Court
Ahmedabad Municipal Transport ... vs Prafulchandra Jayantilal Mehta on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2586/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/10/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2586 of 2010
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
==========================================================
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 ?
==========================================================
AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE THROUGH
TRANSPORT MANA
Versus
PRAFULCHANDRA JAYANTILAL MEHTA & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HA SEJPAL(2103) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR SANDIP C SHAH(792) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 04/10/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This Appeal is filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act,
1983 by the Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service, assailing the
judgement and award dated 24.05.2010, in Claim Petition No.597
of 2000, passed by the Tribunal at Ahmedabad (Rural).
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2586/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/10/2023
undefined
2. The respondent injured aged about 53 years being a passenger of
city bus, run by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation met with
an accident, resulting into permanent partial disability. On
31.01.2000, the injured claimant for the purpose of commute, took
a seat in the city bus owned by the appellant. At the last stop, when
the injured claimant trying to getting off the bus, he fell down due
to sudden jerk and carelessness of the driver of the bus. He
sustained fracture injuries over the lower limb and was admitted in
the hospital for further treatment. He was serving with private
college and rendering his services as a professor and due to
sustaining of the injuries, he was compelled to leave the job and
since then his earning capacity has been reduced substantially. The
respondent claimant filed a claim petition before the Ahmedabad
Tribunal, claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- against the
appellant. The Claim Tribunal vide its judgement and award dated
25.02.2010, by partly allowing the Claim Petition awarded sum of
Rs.4,03,366/-towards the total amount of compensation. Being
aggrieved with the issue of negligence as well as quantum, the bus
owner appellant, has preferred the present appeal.
3. Mr.H.M. Munshaw, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of
the appellant has submitted that the impugned judgement and
award is contrary to the facts, evidence on record and settled
principles of just compensation. He submitted that there was no
fault at all on the part of the driver of the bus, but the claimant
himself in the process of getting down from the bus, fell on the
road. The claimant could have waited for a while as bus was in
process and about the reach at the last destination, but somehow
the claimant was in a hurry from getting down the bus. That, the
aforesaid aspects having not been considered properly by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2586/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/10/2023
undefined
Tribunal and, therefore, the issue of negligence is required to be
reexamined.
4. Mr. Munshaw, on the aspect of quantum awarded by the Tribunal
submitted that as such there is no reduction of the income despite
suffering of permanent partial disablement by the claimant as the
claimant himself voluntarily resigned from his service and,
therefore, the amount awarded under the head of 'future loss' is
required to be modified.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the claimant has
submitted that, the conduct of the bus, failed to perform his duty
and despite the facts that the bus was in motion, he permitted the
passenger getting off the bus. Thus, therefore, the issue of
negligence does not require to be reexamined. On the aspect of
quantum, he submitted that despite of 100% loss, the Tribunal
conservatively awarded the amount under the 'future loss' and,
therefore, the amount of compensation seems to be just, reasonable
and equitable.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, the
point for determination is whether the findings recorded by the
Tribunal on the issue of negligence as well as quantum requires
interference.
7. In the facts of the present case, when bus was in motion, the
claimant, while getting off the bus, fell on the ground and the
wheels of the bus ran over him. In such circumstances, this Court is
of the considered view that despite the bus was in motion, the
conductor was on duty did not try to restrain the passengers nor
cautioned the driver to stop the bus so that said mishap could be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2586/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/10/2023
undefined
avoided. Thus, the Tribunal has rightly held negligent the bus
driver in causing the accident. The same does not require
interference by this Court.
8. So far as quantum part is concerned, it is admitted fact that after
the accident the claimant resigned voluntarily as due to sustaining
of the injuries, he was not in a position to perform his job as a
lecturer. The Tribunal after considering Rs.11,000/- as monthly
income and considering 20% disablement has awarded
Rs.3,49,800/- under the head of 'future loss'. So the amount
awarded does not require any modification as it seems to be just
and reasonable considering the nature of injury and its impact on
the future earnings of the claimant. So far as various amounts
awarded under the different heads are also reasonable, the same
does not require review by this Court.
9. For the aforestated reasons, the present appeal is dismissed being
devoid of any merits. The Tribunal shall disburse the entire amount
in favour of the claimant. Decree be drawn accordingly.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
SUDHIR
