[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Jashodaben Dahyabhai Parmar on 1 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4140/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4140 of 2017
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ORDERS) NO. 1 of 2019
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4140 of 2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
Versus
JASHODABEN DAHYABHAI PARMAR & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR H M SHAH(3997) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR KUNAL S SHAH(5282) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 01/12/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal is preferred against the impugned
judgment and award dated 118.08.2017 passed by the learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux-III), Gandhinagar in
M.A.C.P. No. 491 of 2013, whereby the learned Tribunal has
partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of
Rs.7,77,008/-(Rupees Seven Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand
Eight Only) along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4140/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization, as
compensation.
2. The succinct facts, which lead to the filing of the
captioned appeal are summarized as under :-
i. On 05.09.2013, at about 02:00 p.m., the
deceased-Dahyabhai Kalidas Parmar was
walking along the Adalaj-Chandkheda Highway
within the limits of Village:Adalaj. At that time, a
truck bearing Registration No. GJ-1-CY-5993
being driven at an excessive speed and in a rash
and negligent manner, suddenly came from
behind and violently dashed against the
deceased. Due to the said impact, Dahyabhai
sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to
those injuries.
ii. It is the case of the claimants-respondent nos.1
to 4 herein that at the time of the accident, the
deceased-Dahyabhai was aged about 61 years
and he was getting the pension of Rs.15,000/-
per month.
iii. The notices/summons of the Claim Petition were
duly served upon the opponents. The opponent
no.1 filed Written-Statement vide Exh.18 and
opponent no.2-Insurance Company filed Written
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4140/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
Statement vide Exh.13, thereby, denying all the
averments made in the claim petition and prayed
for dismissal of the claim petition.
iv. Having considered the pleadings of the parties,
the learned Tribunal framed the following issues
at Exh.22, for determination.
i. Whether it is proved that the claimant
sustained injuries on account of
rashness or negligent driving on the part
of the driver of the vehicle involved in
the accident?
ii. What amount, if any, the claimants are
to by way of compensation and from
which of the opponent?
iii. What order and award?
v. In order to prove their claim, the Orig.Claimants
- respondent nos.1 to 4 herein led oral as well as
documentary evidence, which reads as under:-
Sr. Description of Documents Exhibit No.
No.
and cross-examination of
Claimant no.1
accident
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4140/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
vi. The original opponent no.2-appellant herein had
not led any evidence before the learned
Tribunal.
vii. Having considered the oral as well as
documentary evidence on record, and having
considered the submissions of the learned
counsels for the parties, the learned Tribunal
awarded a sum of Rs.7,77,008/-(Rupees Seven
Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Eight Only)
along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum,
from the date of filing of the claim petition till
realization, as compensation, on account of the
death of the deceased-Dahyabhai.
viii. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the
impugned judgment and award, the appellant-
Insurance Company - original opponent no.2
preferred the present appeal on the ground of
quantum.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4140/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
4. Mr. Palak Thakkar, learned advocate for the
appellant/Insurance Company vehemently submitted that at
the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 61 years
and he was pensioner. He further submitted that after the
accident, the pension of the deceased was increased to the
tune of Rs.16,167/- from 01.10.2013. Therefore, the
claimants/respondent nos.1 to 4 are not entitled for any
amount of compensation under the head of future loss of
dependency. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal
has committed a grave error in awarding the sum of
Rs.7,57,008/- under the head of future loss of dependency.
Therefore, the award is required to be modified to that extent.
5. On the other hand, Mr.H.M.Shah, learned advocate
appearing for the original claimants - respondent nos.1 to 4
vehemently submitted that learned Tribunal has awarded the
compensation as per the settled principle of law. He further
submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment
and award, and therefore, the present appeal deserves to be
dismissed.
6. Having considered the submissions of the learned
counsels for the parties and having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the present case, it is to be noted that there
is no dispute regarding the age, income and dependent of the
deceased. It is on record that at the time of accident, the
deceased was aged about 61 years. He was pensioner and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4140/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
getting the pension of Rs.12,060/-. The learned Tribunal, after
considering the pension of the deceased, determined the
income as Rs.12,060/-, and thereafter, deducted the same by
¼ on account of personal expenses of the deceased, as the
deceased was left behind by 4 legal representatives.
Thereafter, the learned Tribunal, after considering the age of
the deceased as 61 years, applied the multiplier of '7' and
awarded a sum of Rs.7,57,008/- under the head of future loss
of dependency. While determining the said amount of
compensation under the head of future loss of dependency,
the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration the income
of the deceased, which was proved on record and the
multiplier and the deduction on account of the personal
expenses of the deceased as per the ratio of the judgment
rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla
Verma and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation 2009
AIR (SC) 3104. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has not
committed any error in awarding a sum of Rs.7,57,008/- under
the head of future loss of dependency. No other contention
was raised. Hence, there is no infirmity in the impugned
judgment and award. Thus, the present appeal is devoid of
merits and, accordingly, stands dismissed.
7. If any amount of compensation, or any statutory amount,
lying deposited with the Registry of this Court shall be
transmitted to the learned Tribunal concerned, in accordance
with the applicable Rules. Records & Proceedings, if any be
sent to the learned Tribunal concerned. No order as to costs.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4140/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
8. In view of the dismissal of the main appeal, connected
Civil Application No.1 of 2019 does not survive and stands
disposed of, accordingly.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
GIRISH
