Gujarat High Court
Hansaben Mansukhbhai Sangani vs Mahmad Shakil Gular Rasul Saiyet on 24 June, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2019 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4594 of 2019
==========================================================
HANSABEN MANSUKHBHAI SANGANI & ORS.
Versus
MAHMAD SHAKIL GULAR RASUL SAIYET & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TUSHAR L SHETH(3920) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Defendant(s) No. 4
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,3
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 24/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant/s - original
claimant/s - legal heirs of the deceased - Mansukhbhai Dayabhai,
being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated
01.12.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.),
Gondal, District : Rajkot in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.360 of
2002, by which the Tribunal has awarded compensation of
Rs.2,94,000/- with 9% per annum interest to the claimant/s, holding
the Opponents liable, jointly and severally.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
2.1 That on 21.05.2002, the deceased - Mansukhbhai
Dayabhai was travelling as pillion rider on motorcycle bearing
registration No. GJ-3-PP-589 which was driven by deceased
Dineshbhai Dhanjibhai Sangani and at about 6:00 a.m., when they
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2019 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2024
undefined
reached on Gondal-Rajkot National Highway Road, near Ashapura
Farm, at that time, the driver of Chhakdo Rickshaw bearing
registration No.GJ-3-V-4095 came with his Chhakdo driving in rash
and negligent manner, will full speed, without observing traffic rules,
so as to endanger to the human life and ultimately by coming on the
wrong side, dashed with the motorcycle in which the deceased was
travelling as pillion rider and hence, the accident has happened. Due
the said accident, the deceased had sustained bodily and other
grievous injuries and ultimately succumbed to the injuries.
Therefore, initially, the legal heirs of the deceased i.e. widow, 2
children and parents have filed claim petition, but later on parents
are deleted, seeking compensation of Rs.20 lakhs with cost and
interest for unnatural and untimely death against the present
respondents before the Tribunal.
2.2 Notices were served to the opponents. There are total
four opponents. Opponents No.1, 2 and 3 have not filed their written
statement against the claim petition. Opponent No.4 - insurance
company of has appeared and filed its written statement / objections
at Exh.12 by disputing all the averments made by the claimant in the
claim petition.
2.3 The Tribunal has framed the issues at Exh.40. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2019 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2024
undefined
preferred by the claimant/s for enhancement.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Tushar Sheth 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, negligence, liability and family circumstances, etc.
He has submitted that the deceased was aged about only 30 years at
the time of accident and was doing agriculture work. He has
submitted that at the relevant point of time, the income of the
deceased was Rs.3,000/- per month. He has fairly submitted that the
learned Tribunal has rightly considered the prospective income. He
has submitted that looking to the dependents, the deduction for
personal expenses would be ¼ and multiplier should be 17 looking to
the age of the deceased. Therefore, considering the loss of
dependency, it would be calculated as Rs.3,000/- per month income
which comes to Rs.36,000/- yearly income plus Rs.14,400/- as 40%
prospective income minus Rs.12,600/- as personal expenses (1/4)
multiplied by 12 months and multiplied by 17 multiplier would come
to Rs.6,42,600/- 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.16,500/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. He has
also submitted that towards loss of consortium, there are two
children and therefore, it would be awarded Rs.88,000/- should be
awarded as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2019 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2024
undefined
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., versus Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder
Kaur reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780.
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. Rathin Raval, 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 and only one is major and others are the minor children. 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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2019 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2024
undefined
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 30 years and was doing agriculture work and earned
Rs.3,000/- per month at the relevant point of time. Therefore, it
would come to Rs.36,000/- per year and by adding 40% prospective
income, as calculated by the learned Tribunal, it would come to
Rs.14,400/- and therefore, total income comes to Rs.50,400/- per
month. Since the deceased is aged about 30 years, 1/4 would proper
to be deducted as personal expenses and therefore, it would come to
Rs.12,600/-. Hence, the income would come to Rs.37,800/- per year
and applying 17 multiplier as per the schedule of the Motor Vehicles
Act as well as the ratio laid down by the 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.6,42,600/- 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.16,500/- and Rs.16,500/-, respectively,
which would be the just and proper compensation.
6.3 Further, there are two children to the deceased.
Therefore, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of United India Insurance Co. Ltd., versus Satinder Kaur @
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2019 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2024
undefined
Satwinder Kaur reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780, Rs.40,000/-
consortium to each dependent and 10% rise, which comes to
Rs.44,000/- as consortium to each dependents, which comes to
Rs.88,000/-, which should be awarded to the claimants.
6.4 Therefore, total compensation would be as under, which
the claimant/s is/are entitled to get.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future Loss of Income 6,42,600/-
Loss of Estate 16,500/-
Funeral Expenses 16,500/-
Loss of consortium 88,000/-
Total... 8,07,600/-
Less : Amount which is already awarded 2,94,000/-
Additional amount which is awarded 5,13,600/-
7. Therefore, I hold that the claimant/s are entitled to get
the total amount of compensation of Rs.8,07,600/- with 9% 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 has already awarded
Rs.2,94,000/-, therefore, remaining amount of Rs.5,13,600/- would be
the enhanced amount of compensation payable to the claimant/s.
8. For the reasons recorded above, the following order is
passed.
8.1 The present appeal is partly allowed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2019 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2024
undefined
8.2 The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
enhanced amount Rs.5,13,600/- with 9% p.a. interest from the date of
claim petition till its realisation before the concerned Tribunal,
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
8.3 The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded amount
lying in the FDR and/or with the Tribunal, with accrued interest
thereon, if any, to the claimants, by account payee cheque / NEFT /
RTGS, after proper verification and after following due procedure.
8.4 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the
courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
8.5 Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned
Tribunal, forthwith.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
M.H. DAVE
