Gujarat High Court

Heir Of Mahendrabhai Vajabhai Chauhan vs Abdul Hamid Ibrahim Surti (Deleted) on 1 August, 2024

                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/FA/295/2011                              JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

                                                                                  undefined




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 295 of 2011


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

==========================================================

1    Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
     to see the judgment ?

2    To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3    Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
     of the judgment ?

4    Whether this case involves a substantial question
     of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
     of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
               HEIR OF MAHENDRABHAI VAJABHAI CHAUHAN
                                Versus
              ABDUL HAMID IBRAHIM SURTI (DELETED) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HENIL M SHAH(10677) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                            Date : 01/08/2024

                           ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant/s -

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

original claimant/s - legal heirs of the deceased -

Mahendrabhai Vajabhai Chauhan - Koli, being aggrieved and

dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 25.10.2010

passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Godhra

in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.615 of 2004, by which

the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,78,003/- with

7.5% per annum interest to the claimant/s, holding Opponents

liable, jointly and severally.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:

2.1 That on 26.08.2003 at about 3:00 p.m., deceased -

Mahendrabhai Vajabhai Chauhan - Koli, along with other

labourers, returning from Dahod to Godhra by unloading the

bricks in the Truck bearing registration No.CPO-8421. The

driver of the Truck was driving the vehicle in rash and

negligent manner and in excessive speed and therefore, he

lost control over the truck and the truck turned turtle. Due

to that the deceased sustained serious injuries. Ultimately, he

succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, the legal heirs of the

deceased - parents have filed claim petition seeking

compensation of Rs.8 lakhs with cost and interest for

unnatural and untimely death against the present

respondents before the Tribunal. It is noted that the mother

was deleted later on before the Tribunal.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

2.2 Notices were served to the opponents. Opponents

No.1 and 2 - driver and owner have chosen not to appear

and contest the claim petition before the Tribunal. Opponent

No.3 - Insurance Company has appeared and has filed its

written statement / objections by disputing all the averments

made by the claimant in the claim petition.

2.3 The Tribunal has framed the issues. The oral as

well as documentary evidence were led by the rival parties

before the Tribunal. After considering the documentary as

well as oral evidence and submissions made at the bar, the

Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition by awarding

compensation as noted above.

2.4 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned

judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the present

appeal is preferred by the claimant/s for enhancement.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Henil M. Shah for the

appellant/s - claimant/s has submitted that the Tribunal has

committed an error in not properly calculating the amount of

compensation. He has submitted that amount of award is on

lower side as the Tribunal has not properly considered the

various aspects; like prospective income of the deceased,

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

negligence, liability and family circumstances, etc. He has

submitted that the deceased was aged about only 25 years at

the time of accident and was a labourer. He has submitted

that at the relevant point of time, his monthly income was

Rs.2,200/-. He has submitted that the learned Tribunal has

not properly considered the prospective income and multiplier.

He has fairly submitted that the Tribunal has rightly

deducted the personal expenses as the deceased was

unmarried. He has submitted that therefore, considering the

loss of dependency, it would be calculated as Rs.2,200/- as

monthly income plus 40% prospective income minus 1/2 as

personal expenses multiplied by 12 months and multiplied by

18 multiplier would come to Rs.3,32,640/- total future loss,

which should be awarded to the claimants by the learned

Tribunal.

He has further submitted that considering the

general and non-pecuniary damages, the learned Tribunal

should award Rs.18,150/- each towards loss of estate and

funeral expenses. He has also submitted that towards loss of

consortium, there are dependents initially and therefore, it

would be awarded Rs.48,400/- should be awarded as per the

decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of United

India Insurance Co. Ltd., versus Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

He has submitted that the compensation is

required to be enhanced by modifying the award impugned

accordingly and this appeal may be allowed.

4. Per contra, Mr. Palak Thakkar, learned advocate for respondent - Insurance Company has submitted that the

impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just

and proper. The Tribunal has rightly considered the income

of the deceased, the age of the deceased, the dependency and

future aspect of income. He has submitted that under the

head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, the Tribunal has

rightly awarded compensation. He has submitted that the

amount under the head of loss of consortium is just and

proper as one dependent i.e. mother was deleted from the

array of the claim petition. He has submitted that this

appeal may be dismissed and no interference be made by

this Court.

5. It is noteworthy to mention that the provisions of

the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which gives paramount

importance to the concept of 'just and fair' compensation. It

is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the

object of providing relief to the victims or their families.

Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with the concept

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

of 'just compensation' which ought to be determined on the

foundation of fairness, reasonableness and equitability.

Although such determination can never be arithmetically

exact or perfect, an endeavor should be made by the Court

to award just and fair compensation irrespective of the

amount claimed by the claimants.

6.1 I have considered the submissions made by the

rival parties. I have perused the record and proceedings of

the Tribunal. I have gone through the impugned judgment

and award passed by the Tribunal. From the record, it

transpires that the deceased was aged about 25 years and

was working as a labourer and his monthly income was

Rs.2,200/- at the relevant point of time. Therefore, it should

be considered as monthly income of the deceased. Hence, it

would come to Rs.2,200/- per month and by adding 40%

prospective income, as calculated by the learned Tribunal, it

would come to Rs.880/- and therefore, total income comes to

Rs.3,080/- per month. Since the deceased is aged about 25

years and was unmarried, therefore, 1/2 would be proper to

be deducted as personal expenses and therefore, it would

come to Rs.1,540/-. Hence, the income would come to

Rs.1,540/- per month and therefore, yearly, it would come to

Rs.18,480/- and applying 18 multiplier as per the schedule of

the Motor Vehicles Act as well as the ratio laid down by the

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma versus Delhi

Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, it would

come to Rs.3,32,640/- as future loss, which is required to be

awarded to the claimants.

6.2 Further, considering the ratio laid down by the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Shethi (supra), as

general and non-pecuniary damages, under the head of loss of

estate and funeral expenses, if we award Rs.18,150/- and

Rs.18,150/-, respectively, which would be the just and proper

compensation.

6.3 Further, initially, there are two dependents i.e.

parents to the deceased. The mother was deleted later on

before the Tribunal. Therefore, as per the decision of the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of United India Insurance

Co. Ltd., versus Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780, Rs.40,000/- consortium to each dependent and 10% rise every three years, which comes to Rs.48,400/-

as consortium to each dependent, which total comes to

Rs.96,800/-, which should be awarded to the claimants.

6.4 Further, looking to the nature of the accident, the

deceased was shifted to the hospital at the Civil Hospital at

Godhra for treatment and later on, he succumbed to the

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

injuries. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly considered the

medical expenses and transportation expenses, which need not

required to be disturbed.

6.5 Therefore, total compensation would be as under,

which the claimant/s is/are entitled to get.

                        Particulars                        Amount (Rs.)

     Future Loss of Income                                         3,32,640/-

     Loss of Estate                                                   18,150/-

     Funeral Expenses                                                 18,150/-

     Loss of consortium                                               96,800/-

     Medical Expenses                                                 16,003/-

     Transportation                                                     6,000/-

                                                Total...             4,87,743/-

     Less : Amount which is already awarded                        2,78,003/-

              Additional amount which is awarded                   2,09,740/-

7. Therefore, I hold that the claimant/s are entitled

to get the total amount of compensation of Rs.4,87,743/- with

7.5% p.a. interest from the date of filing the claim petition

till its realisation, which would meet the ends of justice. Rest

of the direction(s) of the Tribunal remain same. The Tribunal

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/295/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2024

undefined

has already awarded Rs.2,78,003/-, therefore, remaining

amount of Rs.2,09,740/- would be the enhanced amount of

compensation payable to the claimant/s.

8. For the reasons recorded above, the following order