Gujarat High Court
Gova Rava Harijan Through Nephew Rakesh ... vs Osman Suleman Node on 1 October, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2397/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/10/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2397 of 2012
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed NO
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy NO
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question NO
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
GOVA RAVA HARIJAN THROUGH NEPHEW RAKESH @ RAJESH
VIRABHAI
Versus
OSMAN SULEMAN NODE & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HENIL M SHAH(10677) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 01/10/2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
The claimant is in appeal challenging judgment and award dated
13/01/2012 passed in MACP No.892 of 1996 by the learned MACT, Bhuj
Kutchh granting compensation of Rs.56,150/- with proportionate cost and
interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till its
realization from the opponents jointly and severally.
2. That on 23-09-1996 at around 7-30 hours the claimant was waiting
for Bus to go to Padampar Sign Board, near 'T' junction of Rahpar -
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2397/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/10/2024
undefined
Ravechi and Rahpar Pragpar Aadessar road. At that time a bus came there
and applicant raised his hand to stop the bus and the bus driver stopped
the bus. The conductor asked the claimant to sit on the top of the bus and
therefore he sat at the top of the roof. Thereafter according to claimant the
bus driver was driving the bus in rash, reckless and negligent manner
with excessive speed and win the bus reached near the place of accident,
bus driver lost the control and bus went on the wrong side of the road.
The overhead electric wire came into the contact of the neck of the
claimant and he fell down and sustained serious injuries. According to the
claimant the opponent No.1 was driving the bus rashly, recklessly.
negligently and due to his negligence the accident has occurred and he
sustained serious injuries due to which he has become permanently and
totally disabled. As per the claimant he has received serious injuries as
mentioned in the certificate of disability of orthopaedic surgeon and he
has also become disabled due to partial memory loss as per the certificate
of the Neuro Surgeon. He has been taken to the Govt. hospital at Rahpar
and subsequently he has been shifted to G.K. General Hospital at Bhuj for
further treatment where he was treated as an indoor patient from 23-9-
1996 to 17-10-1996 and has incurred huge expenditure on medical
treatment.
3. The claim petition was filed and the opponents were served and
have appeared and tribunal after considering the evidence on record,
passed the award in question as stated in paragraph 1of this judgment.
4. The tribunal assessed the compensation considering the income of
the claimant to Rs.18,000/- and added 30% towards the future loss of
income and applying multiplier of 17 assessed the compensation at
Rs.91,800/- but deducted 50% towards self negligence on the ground that
he was travelling on the rooftop of the ST Bus by taking aid of Section
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2397/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/10/2024
undefined
123(2) of the MV Act which indicates that no travelling is permitted on
the rooftop of the ST Bus.
5. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
6. What could be noticed in the present case is that looking to the
facts and circumstances of the claimant having aged about 25 years
received injury from the road accident where the involvement of the
vehicle is not deniable and therefore if Rs.20,000/- is to be added more in
the compensation already granted, it would be in the fitness of just and
fair compensation looking to the aspect that claimant was travelling on
the rooftop of the ST Bus; however no such interest will be calculated on
the enhanced amount of Rs.20,000/-.
7. In the result, the appeal stands partly allowed. The impugned
judgment and award is modified to the extent of Rs.76,150/- (Rs.56,150/-
+ Rs.20,000/-) to be recovered from the opponents jointly and severally
with costs and interest @ 7.5 % p.a. as awarded by the tribunal. The
enhanced amount of Rs.20,000/- shall not carry any interest and to be
deposited by the ST Corporation within a period of four weeks from
today after deducting necessary court fees on the enhanced amount of
compensation.
8. The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded lying in the FDR
and/or with the Tribunal, including enhanced amount with accrued
interest thereon, if any, to the claimant/s, by account payee cheque /
NEFT / RTGS, after proper verification and after following due
procedure.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
sompura
