Gujarat High Court
Gujarat State Road Transport ... vs Kalpesh Punjabhai Chudasma on 20 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3775/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3775 of 2024
==========================================================
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
KALPESH PUNJABHAI CHUDASMA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 20/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Challenge in this appeal under Section 173 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short M.V. Act) is
against the judgment and award dated 28.03.2024 passed
by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special) &
10th Additional District Judge, Rajkot in Motor Accident
Claim Petition No.985 of 2017, whereby the learned
Tribunal has allowed the claim petition.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.H.S.Munshaw for the
appellant - original opponent No.1-GSRTC. Though served,
none appeared for respondents.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3775/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
3. Brief facts narrated in the present First Appeal
are as under:-
3.1 On 17.05.2017, at about 8:00 p.m., the
deceased, Bhaniben Punjabhai Chudasma, was standing on
footpath near Bus Stand of village Siloj. At that time, the
driver of S.T.Bus bearing Registration No.GJ-18Z-1463
came at an excessive speed, rashly and negligently, and
collided with the motorcycle bearing registration No.GJ-
11AG-2718, as well as with the deceased. As a result, the
deceased - Bhaniben Punjabhai Chudasma, sustained
grievous injuries and succumbed.
3.3 The legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim
petition seeking compensation of Rs.16,00,000/- from the
opponents. Notices were served to opponents. Opponent
No.1 appeared and filed a written statement at Ex.18.
Though served, opponent No.2 neither appeared nor filed
any written statement.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3775/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
3.4 After considering the evidence and materials
placed on record, the learned Tribunal allowed the claim
petition and ordered that applicants are entitled for
compensation of Rs.20,20,400/- with proportionate costs
and interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of
the claim petition till realization from opponent No.1-
GSRTC. Opponent No.2 - owner of motorcycle was
exonerated from liability to pay compensation.
3.5 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
quantum of compensation, opponent No.1-GSRTC is before
this Court.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted
that, at the time of accident, deceased was aged about 35
years. The learned Tribunal, in absence of any cogent and
convincing evidence regarding income, has assessed the
monthly income of deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month.
It is further submitted that the present appeal is filed
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3775/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
only challenging the quantum of compensation.
Additionally, it is submitted that the claimants have not
provided any proof to substantiate that deceased was aged
about 35 years at the relevant point of time.
5. Considering the submissions canvassed by the
learned advocate for the appellant and perusing materials
available on record, it is found that the accident has
occurred on 17.05.2017 when the deceased was standing
on the footpath near bus stand. At that time driver of
S.T.Bus was driving at excessive speed, rashly and dashed
with motorcycle bearing registration No.GJ-11-AG-2718
and also dashed with the deceased. Resultantly, deceased
sustained fatal injuries. The learned Tribunal considered
the Postmortem Report and Inquest Panchnama for
determining the age of deceased. Both, Postmortem Report
and Inquest Panchnama indicate the age of deceased as 35
years. In absence of any other convincing evidence to
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3775/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
establish the age of deceased, Postmortem Report and
Inquest Panchnama are the best evidence to determine the
age of the deceased. In my view, the learned Tribunal has
not committed any error in coming to the conclusion that
deceased was aged about 35 years.
6. So far as the income of the deceased is
concerned, the claimant has stated that deceased was
doing agricultural work and earning Rs.10,000/- per
month. The husband of the deceased has expired and
deceased was only earning member of the family. The
contention raised by the learned advocate for the appellant
that there was no evidence on record to substantiate the
income and the learned Tribunal has erred in assessing the
income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month. The
settled position of law in the cases where claimants have
no documentary evidence with regard to the income, the
learned Tribunal has to take into consideration the rates of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3775/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
minimum wages prevailing at the time of accident. Since
the accident has occurred in the year 2017, the minimum
wages for unskilled persons during that period were
Rs.7,946/- per month.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, in my view, the learned Tribunal has assessed
income of Rs.9,000/- per month which is just and proper.
In absence of any other submissions, I find no reason to
interfere in the findings of the learned Tribunal. Hence,
present First Appeal deserves to be dismissed and the same
is hereby dismissed accordingly.
9. Record and proceedings, if any received, be sent
back to the concerned Court/Tribunal.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MANOJ
