Gujarat High Court
Naynaben Yogeshbhai Patel vs Virendra Takhatsinh Solanki(Rajput) on 26 June, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4997/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4997 of 2018
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 ?
==========================================================
NAYNABEN YOGESHBHAI PATEL & ORS.
Versus
VIRENDRA TAKHATSINH SOLANKI(RAJPUT) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR R G DWIVEDI(6601) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR KV GADHIA(319) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 26/06/2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
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 - Yogeshbhai Patel, being
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4997/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated
02.04.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.),
Vadodara in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.308 of 2005, by which
the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.5,74,000/- with 9% 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 23.09.2004, the deceased - Yogeshbhai was
travelling in Tata Sumo bearing registration No.GJ-6-AA-1989. The
said Tata Sumo was being driven by opponent No.1 in rash and
negligent manner endangering the human life. When they were
passing through the place of incident, opponent No.1 had tried to
save one motorcycle coming from the opposite direction, but as
opponent No.1 was driving the errant vehicle in excessive speed and
turned turtle and accident has occurred. The deceased has received
grievous fatal injuries and succumbed to it. Therefore, the legal heirs
of the deceased - widow, 2 minor children and mother have filed
claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.15 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. Opponents No.1
and 2 - driver and owner, respectively, did not file their written
statement contesting the claim of the applicants. Opponent No.3 -
insurance company has appeared and has filed its written statement /
objections at Exh.11 by disputing all the averments made by the
claimant in the claim petition.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4997/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
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.R.G. Dwivedi 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 a labourer and was doing agriculture
work. He has submitted that at the relevant point of time, the month
income of the deceased was Rs.2,700/-. He has fairly submitted that
the learned Tribunal has rightly considered the prospective income,
deduction of personal expenses looking to the age of the deceased
and multiplier. He has submitted that therefore, considering the loss
of dependency, it would be calculated as Rs.2,700/- as monthly
income plus Rs.1,080/- as 40% prospective income minus Rs.945/- as
personal expenses (1/4) multiplied by 12 months and multiplied by 16
multiplier would come to Rs.544320/- total future loss, which should
be awarded to the claimants by the learned Tribunal.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4997/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
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 four
dependents and therefore, it would be awarded Rs.1,93,600/- 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.
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. Gadhiya, 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4997/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
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
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 working as a labourer and was doing
agriculture work and thereby, earned monthly income of Rs.2,700/-
at the relevant point of time. Therefore, it should be considered as
the monthly income of the deceased. Accordingly, it would come to
Rs.2,700/- per month and by adding 40% prospective income, as
calculated by the learned Tribunal, it would come to Rs.1,080/- and
therefore, total income comes to Rs.3,780/- 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.945/-. Hence,
the income would come to Rs.2,835/- per month and therefore,
yearly, it would come to Rs.34,020/- and applying 16 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.5,44,320/- as future loss, which is required to be awarded to
the claimants.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4997/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
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, there are four dependents to the deceased,
consisting widow, two minor children and mother. 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 and accident is of the year 2018, which
comes to Rs.48,400/- as consortium to each dependents, which comes
to Rs.1,93,600/-, 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 5,44,320/-
Loss of Estate 18,150/-
Funeral Expenses 18,150/-
Loss of consortium 1,93,600/-
Total... 7,74,220/-
Less : Amount which is already awarded 5,74,000/-
Additional amount which is awarded 2,00,220/-
7. Therefore, I hold that the claimant/s are entitled to get
the total amount of compensation of Rs.7,74,220/- with 9% p.a.
interest from the date of filing the claim petition till its realisation,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4997/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
which would meet the ends of justice. Rest of the direction(s) of the
Tribunal remain same. The Tribunal has already awarded
Rs.5,74,000/-, therefore, remaining amount of Rs.2,00,220/- 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.
8.2 The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
enhanced amount Rs.2,00,220/- 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
