Gujarat High Court
Hiraben Govindbhai Patel vs Sureshbhai Bachubhai Barot on 18 September, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1057/2009 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1057 of 2009
==========================================================
HIRABEN GOVINDBHAI PATEL & 4 other(s)
Versus
SURESHBHAI BACHUBHAI BAROT & 2 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AMIT N PATEL(2749) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR MAULIK J SHELAT(2500) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR SHUSHIL R SHUKLA(5603) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 18/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal at Ahmedabad, the original
claimants have preferred the present appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation.
2. The accident and involvement of the vehicle as well as the
issue of negligence are not disputed. Deceased Govindbhai
aged about 47 years old died in the alleged accident. The
appellants are legal heirs of the deceased. They had filed
claim petition no.900 of 1995 before the Tribunal at
Ahmedabad. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence
on record, assessed monthly income Rs.5,130/- of the
deceased and accordingly, awarded the amount of
compensation Rs.5,02,668/- with interest. The claimants
have preferred the present appeal for enhancement of
compensation on the ground that the Tribunal failed to
consider the proper income of the deceased and therefore,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1057/2009 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2023
undefined
the impugned award requires modification.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel Mr.Maulik Shelat has
supported the findings of the Tribunal on the aspect of
income and final determination of the dependency loss and
submitted that no case is made out for enhancement of the
compensation.
4. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties
and on perusal of the material placed on record, the issue
arose for consideration is whether amount of
compensation, as determined by the Tribunal, needs any
enhancement. In the facts of present case, the deceased
was serving as Assistant Teacher with monthly salary of
Rs.6,150/- and the same was established by a certificate
at Exh.31. It appears that the learned Tribunal deducted
the amount of Rs.1,000/- towards the provident funds
contribution. The learned Tribunal ought not to have
deducted Rs.1,000/- contributed by the deceased to his
G.P.F Account. Thus, in order to determine the
dependency loss, the total compensation payable to the
claimants as per the judgment of Pranay Shetty is as
under:
Salary Rs.6,130/- + 30% prospective rise - 1/4th personal
expenses (monthly dependency loss Rs.5,977/-), and
applying multiplier 13 = total loss would come to
Rs.9,32,412/- and in addition to that, the conventional
amount Rs.70,000/- is required to be awarded and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1057/2009 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2023
undefined
considering this, total amount of compensation comes to
Rs.10,02,412/-. The Tribunal has assessed 10% negligence
of the deceased which comes to Rs.1,00,241/- and after
deducting the same, the net dependency loss comes to
Rs.9,02,171/-. The award passed by the Tribunal is
Rs.5,02,668/- and the same is required to be deducted from
the total amount and therefore, the enhanced amount
payable to the claimants comes to Rs.3,99,503/-.
5. For the reasons recorded, the claimants are entitled for the
enhanced amount Rs.3,99,503/- and accordingly, the
appeal is allowed in part by enhancing the aforesaid
compensation. The enhanced amount shall carry at the
rate of 6%. The Insurance Company shall deposit the said
amount within two months from the date of receipt of this
order. The Tribunal shall disburse the said entire amount
without further investment in FDR. Decree be drawn
accordingly.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
Rakesh
