Gujarat High Court
Bhumikaben Ashwinbhai Shah vs United India Insurance Company Limited on 27 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1980/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1980 of 2017
==========================================================
BHUMIKABEN ASHWINBHAI SHAH & ANR.
Versus
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED. & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PH BUCH with MR NILAY SUCHAK(1018) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
SHARMISHTA A DAVE(8735) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 27/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Present appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellants - original claimants
challenging the Judgment and Award dated 10.01.2017 passed
by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad
in M.A.C.P. No.314/2011.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. P. H. Buch assisted by
learned advocate Mr. Nilay suchak for appellants and learned
advocate Ms. Sharmishta A. Dave for respondent No.1.
3. The brief facts of the case are as under:
On 19.03.2011, at about 01:45 p.m. deceased Ashwinbhai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1980/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2025
undefined
Chinubhai Shah was going towards Ghanshyamnagar Flat
from Metropol Hotel. While crossing the road, he was
standing on the road side and at that time, driver of the
Enfiled bearing registration No. GJ-1-JJ-5454 came from
wrong side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with
the deceased. Resultantly, deceased Ashwinbhai Chinubhai
Shah sustained serious bodily injuries and because of the
accidental injuries, he succumbed.
4. Claim petition was filed by the legal heirs of deceased
Ashwinbhai Chinubhai Shah for a compensation of
Rs.13,39,000/- before the learned Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Ahmedabad being MACP No.314/2011. Notice of the
claim petition was served to all opponents. The insurance
company appeared and filed written statement at Exh.-13 and
denied the liability to pay the compensation. Claimant No.1 -
Arunaben Ashwinbhai Shah expired on 27.06.2016 during the
pendency of claim petition. The claim petition was proceeded
by the claimant Nos.2 and 3 being the daughters of deceased.
Before the death of claimant No.1, she has deposed at Ex-25
and also examined two witnesses at Ex-33 and Ex-37.
Claimants produced documentary evidence in support of their
claim petitions. Issues were framed at Ex-22 and after
considering the evidence on record, learned Tribunal partly
allowed the claim petition by directing opponents jointly and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1980/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2025
undefined
severally to pay an amount of Rs.6,40,000/- to the claimants
with proportionate costs and interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the
date of petition till realisation. The claimants being the
appellants are dissatisfied with the question of applying the
multiplier have filed the present appeal.
5. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the
present appeal is filed challenging the adoption of multiplier
only and so far as the rest of the award is concerned,
claimants are satisfied with the award. Learned advocate for
the appellant submitted that deceased was aged about 66
years of age and was a senior advocate and was practicing
as an advocate more than 20 years at the time of accident.
It is submitted that claimant No.2 - Bhumikaben Ashwinbhai
Shah is unmarried and claimant No.3 Payalben Ashwinbhai
Shah being second daughter of deceased is specially abled
child. Both the daughters were major on the date of claim
petition. It is further submitted that learned Tribunal ought
to have granted 14 multiplier while calculating the
compensation. It is therefore submitted that learned Tribunal
has applied very meager multiplier of 5. Except these
submissions, no other submissions are made by the learned
advocate for the appellant.
6. Per contra, learned advocate for the insurance company
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1980/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2025
undefined
has supported the judgment and award and submitted that
the learned Tribunal has applied ratio laid down in the case
of National Insurance Company Limited versus Pranay Shethi
reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and rightly applied multiplier
of 5 looking to the age of deceased who was aged about 66
years of age at the point of time, hence multiplier of 5 is
just and proper multiplier being adopted by learned Tribunal.
7. Having considered the submissions and the ratio laid
down in the case of Pranay Shethi (supra), learned Tribunal
has adopted multiplier of 5 while calculating the
compensation. The question of what is just and reasonable
compensation has been well settled in the decision of Pranay
Shethi (supra), on perusal of award, learned Tribunal cannot
be said to have ignored the said principles of law. Since no
contrary material is found from record which can weigh this
Court in disturbing the applicability of multiplier in the
present case. Looking to the facts of the case, learned
Tribunal has rightly applied multiplier as 5 in calculation.
Further considering the submission made by learned advocate
for the appellant that one of the daughters of deceased is
divorcee as observed by learned Tribunal in its award and
since the second daughter is a specially abled child, it would
be in the interest of justice and for purpose of just and
reasonable compensation the claimants are granted interest @
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1980/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2025
undefined
9% p.a. instead of 7.5% from the date of application till
realisation.
8. In view of the above discussion, the amount of
judgment and award is modified to the effect that the
claimants shall be entitled to compensation of Rs.6,40,000/-
with interest @ 9% from the date of petition till realisation.
Insurance Company - Respondent No.2 herein is directed to
deposit the enhanced compensation within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Resultantly,
Appeal is partly allowed accordingly. Rest of the order
remains the same.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MAYA
