Gujarat High Court
Sakriben Wd/O. Bachubhai ... vs Sabbir Ahmed Makrani on 29 September, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2073/2006 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2073 of 2006
==========================================================
SAKRIBEN WD/O. BACHUBHAI KALIYABHAI PARMAR BHILL & 6 other(s)
Versus
SABBIR AHMED MAKRANI & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ARPIT A KAPADIA(3974) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MR C S SHUKLA(7549) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 29/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal at Dahod, the appellants being
original claimants have preferred the present appeal,
seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. Deceased Bachubhai aged about 30 years old, died in a
road accident, which allegedly took place on 21.10.1999.
On the day of accident, the scooter upon which the
deceased was ridding, hit by the offender bus, which
belongs to S.T. Corporation, as a result of which, the
deceased died on the spot. The widow of the deceased and
six minor children had filed claim petition (3267 of 2004),
claiming compensation against the driver and owner of the
offending bus. The claim Tribunal at Dahod vide its
judgment and award dated 12.04.2006, awarded a sum of
amount of Rs.3,08,500/- towards the total amount of
compensation.
3. The appellants, being legal heirs of the deceased, aggrieved
with the said judgment, have present present appeal.
4. Mr.Arpit Kapadia, learned counsel appearing for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2073/2006 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2023
undefined
appellants, has submitted that the impugned judgment
and award is unjust, unreasonable and inadequate as the
learned Tribunal failed to appreciate the prospective
income of the deceased while granting amount under the
head of dependency loss. Thus, therefore, in view of the
recent judgment of the Apex Court, the award deserves to
be modified.
5. On the other hand, Mr.C.S. Shukla, learned advocate for
the S.T. Corporation, has supported the findings of the
Tribunal on the aspect of income as well as the amount of
compensation and submitted that no case is made out for
enhancement of the compensation.
6. Having heard learned counsels for the respective parties
and on perusal of the material placed on record, the issue
arose for my consideration is to whether the amount of
compensation, as determined by the Tribunal, needs any
enhancement.
7. In the facts of present case, the involvement of the vehicle,
the issue of negligence determined by the Tribunal, age of
the deceased and his avocation are not in dispute. It is the
case of the appellants that the deceased was earning
Rs.7,000/- per month as by profession, he was doing
contract work and was having income from agricultural
processes. The revenue record at Exh.26 was relied upon
by the claimants. The learned Tribunal, taking into
account daily Rs.70/-, determined the monthly income of
Rs.2,100/- and without addition of future prospective
income awarded Rs.2,83,500/- under the head of
dependency loss. In these circumstances, this Court is of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2073/2006 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2023
undefined
the considered view that the learned Tribunal fell into error
while not considering the prospective income of the
deceased. Thus, the case for enhancement of
compensation is made out. The total compensation payable
to the claimants is computed as under:
Dependency loss - Rs.4,79,400/-
(Rs.2,100/- + 40% = Rs.2,940/- - 1/5th =
Rs.2,352/- x 12 = Rs.28,200/- x 17 =
Rs.4,79,400/-)
Conventional amount - Rs.70,000/-
----------------------------------------
Total - Rs.5,49,400/-
8. In view of the above, the appellants are entitled to get
enhanced amount of compensation Rs.2,40,900/-
(Rs.5,49,400/- - Rs.3,08,500/- = Rs.2,40,900/-). The
enhanced amount will carry interest at the rate of 6% from
the date of filing of the claim petition.
9. For the reasons recorded, the appeal is allowed in part.
The appellants are entitled to get the aforesaid enhanced
amount and the respondents are directed to deposit the
said amount with the period of two months. The claim
Tribunal shall disburse the amount in favour of the
appellants without making further investment in the FDR.
Decree be drawn accordingly.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
Rakesh
