Gujarat High Court
Jograj Shiremal Ranka vs Babsingh Dalpatsingh Rajput ... on 6 September, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4394/2009 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4394 of 2009
==========================================================
JOGRAJ SHIREMAL RANKA & 3 other(s)
Versus
BABSINGH DALPATSINGH RAJPUT (RAJPUT) & 2 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR SUNIL B PARIKH(582) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 06/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the original
claimants - appellants have filed the present appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation.
2. Deceased Shiremal Ranka aged about 80 years, was died in a road
accident. On the day of incident dated 12.09.1997, the deceased
being a passenger of the Luxury bus sustained fatal injuries and
succumbed to his injuries on 01.03.1997. The widow and others
being legal heirs had filed claim petition No. 1091 of 1997, against
the driver, owner and insurance company of the bus. The widow
Jamnadevi died during the pendency of the claim petition. Learned
Tribunal (MACT (Aux.) Surat), vide its judgment and award dated
09.03.2017, by partly allowing the application, awarded
Rs.65,000/- towards the amount of compensation, but on account
of death of the widow the Tribunal did not award any amount
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4394/2009 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2023
undefined
under the head of dependency loss.
3. Being dissatisfied with the non-awarding the amount of
dependency loss, the claimants have preferred the present appeal,
seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation.
4. This court has heard learned counsel Mr. Hiren Modi and Mr. Sunil
Parikh, learned advocate for the respective parties.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, the
issue arise for determination is whether amount of compensation as
determined by the Tribunal needs any enhancement?
6. It is not in dispute that, the wife of the deceased - original claimant
no. 1 died during the pendency of the claim petition. It is settled
law that, if person is died after filing the petition, then, the Tribunal
should have awarded the amount as if person is alive. Thus,
therefore, the Tribunal committed an error of law while not
awarding the amount under the head of dependency loss. Thus,
therefore, the present appellants being legal heirs of the deceased,
are entitled to get the amount of dependency loss. The deceased
died at the age of 80 years and he was regularly filing Income Tax
return and copy of the returns were produced before the Tribunal at
Exh. 46, 47 and 48. On this issue, learned counsel Mr. Sunil
Parikh, stated that, for the income tax purpose, returns were filed
and on record, as such the deceased was not doing any business.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present
case, taking into consideration the actual income of Rs.3000/-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4394/2009 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2023
undefined
without future prospects, the yearly it would come Rs.3000X12=
36,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd towards the personal expenses,
the dependency loss would come to Rs.24,000/- and applying the
multiplier of 5, the total loss would come to Rs.1,20,000/- and
accordingly after respondent-computation of amount of
compensation, the said amount is payable to the appellants.
7. For the reasons recorded, the present appeal is allowed in part. The
appellants are entitled to get enhanced amount of Rs.1,20,000/- and
insurance company is directed to pay the said amount with running
interest at the rate of 6% within 2 months from the receipt of date
of this order. The Tribunal shall disburse the entire amount to the
claimants. Decree be drawn accordingly.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
P.S. JOSHI/08.09
