Gujarat High Court
Parvatbhai Narsingbhai Sangada vs Mayurbhai Aarsingbhai Chandravadiya on 2 July, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4768 of 2023
==========================================================
PARVATBHAI NARSINGBHAI SANGADA & ANR.
Versus
MAYURBHAI AARSINGBHAI CHANDRAVADIYA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MS DIMPLE A THAKER(6838) for the Defendant(s) No. 4
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 02/07/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellants - original claimants, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award dated 24.11.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Visavadar in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.202 of 2015, by which the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- with 9% per annum interest to the claimants.
2. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
3. Learned advocate for the appellants has submitted that amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-, awarded by the tribunal is very meager considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Meena Devi Vs. Nunu Page 1 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined Chand Mahto @ Nemchand Mahto reported in 2023 (1) SCC
204. He has also further submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court has also considered the similar issue in the case of Kishan Gopal and Others Vs. Lala and Others reported in (2014) 1 SCC 244 as well as in the case of Kurvan Ansari Vs. Shyam Kishore Murmu and another reported in (2022) 1 SCC 317, where the age of person is less than 18 years, the amount is required to be awarded appropriately. He has submitted that in view of the judgment of Meena Devi (supra), the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- is required to be awarded, whereas, the tribunal has awarded only Rs.2,00,000/-, therefore, further enhancement of Rs.3,00,000/- is required to be awarded by this Court. Therefore, he prays to allow this appeal with regard to the above mentioned enhancement.
4. Learned advocate for the respondent has submitted that the tribunal has awarded just and proper amount in the facts and circumstances of the case. However, he is not in a position to dispute the legal position which is cited at the bar pursuant to the judgment delivered in the cases of Meena Devi (supra) and Kishan Gopal (supra) and he was not able to distinguish facts of the present case from the facts of the judgments mentioned above.
Page 2 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined
5. Considering the submissions made at the bar and after hearing the learned advocates for the respective parties. I am of the view that the tribunal has not properly dealt with the issue regarding the applicability of the judgments in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) and Kurvan Ansari (supra). It is also relevant to note that in the year 2022, the Hon'ble Apex Court has also reconfirmed the ratio laid down by the judgment in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) through the judgment rendered in the case of Meena Devi (supra), wherein, relevant paragraphs of the judgment in the case of Meena Devi (supra) are reproduced as under:
"4. The adequacy of grant of such compensation has been questioned by filing the present appeal, inter alia, contending that the High Court erred in assessing the amount in the heads of "pecuniary" and "non- pecuniary" loss. MACT and the High Court have not granted any amount under the head "loss of prospective happiness" and other conventional heads and the amount as granted under the head of loss of dependency is inadequate. Therefore, the compensation may be enhanced. Placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in R.K. Malik v. Kiran Pal [R.K. Malik v. Kiran Pal, (2009) 14 SCC 1 : (2009) 5 SCC (Civ) 265 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 1265], it is urged that the High Court committed error in assessing the less quantum for notional income of the deceased without adding "future prospect" while computing the compensation. Reliance has further been placed on the judgment of this Court in Kishan Gopal v. Lala [Kishan Gopal v. Lala, (2014) 1 SCC 244 : (2014) 1 SCC (Civ) 184 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 241] wherein the Page 3 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined compensation has been calculated treating Rs 30,000 as notional income including future prospects in place of Rs 15,000 as specified in the IInd Schedule of the MV Act and applying the multiplier as specified in the judgment of Sarla Verma v. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 121. It is further contended that in case of death, just and reasonable amount of compensation ought to be awarded along with interest as permissible. It is urged that the valuation of the claim is immaterial to grant just and reasonable compensation, however the High Court committed error restricting the compensation equal to valuation of claim petition.
8. Reverting to computation of compensation in the facts of this case, a child died in a road accident at the age of 12 years while playing in front of his house. He was studying in 5th class in Nehru Academy, Giridih Road, Jamtara, Dumri, however it is required to be seen how the computation of compensation may be made. As per the ocular statement given by his mother, it is clear that the deceased child was a brilliant student of Class 5 and if he had not met with the accident, he would have definitely become an officer in future. In the said factual matrix, the compensation is required to be determined.
9. In the judgment of R.K. Malik [R.K. Malik v. Kiran Pal, (2009) 14 SCC 1 : (2009) 5 SCC (Civ) 265 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 1265], 29 children going in a school bus died by drowning in Yamuna River while the offending vehicle fell down, breaking the railings of the bridge in a road accident, took place in November 1997. In the said case this Court held that the principle for determination of the compensation may be observed applying the IInd Schedule of the MV Act and the appropriate multiplier considering the age of parents. It has also been said that the claim with regard to the future prospects should have been addressed by the courts based on the performance and the reputation of the school. In the said case, the principles laid down by this Court in Lata Page 4 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined Wadhwa v. State of Bihar [Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar, (2001) 8 SCC 197] and M.S. Grewal v. Deep Chand Sood [M.S. Grewal v. Deep Chand Sood, (2001) 8 SCC 151 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 1426] have been followed and enhancement was made. Thus relying upon the observation, it is said that in place of issuing any guidelines for determination of compensation in case of death of a child, it may be left open to be decided in the facts and circumstances of each case. In M.S. Grewal [M.S. Grewal v. Deep Chand Sood, (2001) 8 SCC 151 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 1426] , 14 school students died due to drowning in a river. This Court noticing that the students were belonging to upper middle class background, however awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs 5,00,000. In Lata Wadhwa [Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar, (2001) 8 SCC 197] , it was clarified that the compensation may be awarded dividing the children in the age groups of 5 to 10 and 10 to 15 years. It is held that such grant of compensation will not necessarily bar the parents to claim prospective loss and it will be valid. This Court also relied upon the principles as laid down by the House of Lords in the famous case of Taff Vale Railway Co. v. Jenkins [Taff Vale Railway Co. v. Jenkins, 1913 AC 1 (HL)] , wherein Lord Atkinson observed as thus :
"... all that is necessary is that a reasonable expectation of pecuniary benefit should be entertained by the person who sues. It is quite true that the existence of this expectation is an inference of fact--there must be a basis of fact from which the inference can reasonably be drawn; but I wish to express my emphatic dissent from the proposition that it is necessary that two of the facts without which the inference cannot be drawn are, first, that the deceased earned money in the past and, second, that he or she contributed to the support of the plaintiff. These are, no doubt, pregnant pieces of evidence, but they are only pieces of evidence; and the necessary inference can, I think, be drawn from Page 5 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined circumstances other than and different from them."
10. Thereafter in Kishan Gopal [Kishan Gopal v. Lala, (2014) 1 SCC 244 : (2014) 1 SCC (Civ) 184 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 241] , a child aged about 10 years died in a road accident took place on 19-7-1992, this Court made departure from the IInd Schedule of the MV Act and accepted the notional income of Rs 30,000 in place of Rs 15,000 applying the analogy that the value of rupee has come down drastically since 1994 when the notional income of Rs 15,000 was fixed in IInd Schedule of the MV Act. However accepting the notional income as Rs 30,000 and as per the age of the parents i.e. 36 years, the loss of dependency was calculated applying the multiplier of 15 at Rs 4,50,000 and a sum of Rs 50,000 was awarded under conventional heads awarding a total sum of compensation of Rs 5,00,000.
11. Recently in Kurvan Ansari v. Shyam Kishore Murmu [Kurvan Ansari v. Shyam Kishore Murmu, (2022) 1 SCC 317 : (2022) 1 SCC (Civ) 365 :
(2022) 1 SCC (Cri) 173] , wherein a child aged about 7 years died in a road accident took place on 6-9-2004, this Court taking notional income as Rs 25,000, applying the multiplier of 15, calculated the loss of dependency as Rs 3,75,000 and adding Rs 55,000 in conventional heads, awarded Rs 4,70,000.
12. In view of the foregoing decisions, it is apparent that in the cases of child death, the notional income of Rs 15,000 as specified in the IInd Schedule of the MV Act has been enhanced on account of devaluation of money and value of rupee coming down from the date on which the IInd Schedule of the MV Act was introduced and the said notional income was treated as Rs 30,000 in Kishan Gopal [Kishan Gopal v. Lala, (2014) 1 SCC 244 : (2014) 1 SCC (Civ) 184 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 241] and Rs 25,000 in Kurvan Ansari [Kurvan Ansari v. Shyam Kishore Page 6 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined Murmu, (2022) 1 SCC 317 : (2022) 1 SCC (Civ) 365 : (2022) 1 SCC (Cri) 173] in age group of 10 and 7 years respectively.
13. Thus applying the ratio of the said judgments, looking to the age of the child in the present case i.e. 12 years, the principles laid down in Kishan Gopal [Kishan Gopal v. Lala, (2014) 1 SCC 244 : (2014) 1 SCC (Civ) 184 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 241] are aptly applicable to the facts of the present case. As per the ocular statement of the mother of the deceased, it is clear that the deceased was a brilliant student and studying in a private school. Therefore, accepting the notional earning Rs 30,000 including future prospect and applying the multiplier of 15 in view of the decision of this Court in Sarla Verma [Sarla Verma v. DTC, (2009) 6 SCC 121 : (2009) 2 SCC (Civ) 770 : (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 1002] , the loss of dependency comes to Rs 4,50,000 and if we add Rs 50,000 in conventional heads, then the total sum of compensation comes to Rs 5,00,000. As per the judgment of MACT, lump sum compensation of Rs 1,50,000 has been awarded, while the High Court enhanced it to Rs 2,00,000 up to the value of the claim petition. In our view, the said amount of compensation is not just and reasonable looking to the computation made hereinabove. Hence, we determine the total compensation as Rs 5,00,000 and on reducing the amount as awarded by the High Court i.e. Rs 2,00,000, the enhanced amount comes to Rs 3,00,000.
14. At this stage, it is necessary to clarify that as per the decision of a three-Judge Bench of this Court in Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh [Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 274 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 523] , it was observed that under the MV Act, there is no restriction that the Tribunal/Court cannot award compensation exceeding the amount so claimed. The Tribunal/Court ought to award "just" compensation which is reasonable in the facts relying upon the evidence Page 7 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined produced on record. Therefore, less valuation, if any, made in the claim petition would not be impediment to award just compensation exceeding the claimed amount."
6. Considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Meena Devi (supra) and other cases mentioned in that judgment, I am of the view that in the present case, whereby, the deceased who has expired in the accident is undisputedly aged 7 years as per the finding given by the tribunal, by relying on the various evidence; like F.I.R, Panchnama and deposition of the appellant/s, whereby, it transpires that the deceased girl was studying and was going on the scooter as a pillion rider, at that point of time, accident has occurred and the deceased lost her life in the said accident. Therefore, it is not disputed that the age of the deceased girl was 7 years. There is no proof of income available on the record, though, it is averred that she was also doing some other activity, in that case, the judgment in the case of Meena Devi (supra) is required to be applied and therefore, in view of the ratio laid down by judgment of Meena Devi (supra), more particularly, para 13 of that judgment, the annual notional earning of Rs.30,000/- is required to be considered and therefore, total Rs.5,00,000/- is required to be awarded by awarding multiplier of 15. Loss of dependency comes to Rs.4,50,000/- and Rs.50,000/- is required to be added Page 8 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined towards the conventional head and therefore, total sum of Rs.5,00,000/- is required to be awarded.
7. Considering the fact that the tribunal has awarded only Rs.2 lakh, the present appeal is allowed by awarding Rs.5,00,000/- to the claimants and by enhancing the awarded amount of the tribunal to the tune of Rs.3 lakh. Therefore, the enhanced amount by this Court to the tune of Rs.3 lakh with 9% per annum interest from the date of claim petition till actual realization shall be deposited by the respondent No.3 - Insurance Company within a period of 4 weeks from today before the concerned tribunal.
8. On deposition of such amount, the Tribunal shall immediately disburse the entire awarded amount (including the enhanced amount) lying in the FDR and/or with the Tribunal, with accrued interest thereon, if any, to the claimants, by account payee cheque or by transferring the entire awarded amount in the bank account of the claimant/s, after proper verification.
9. With above observations and directions, the present appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
10. Record and proceedings, if any, lying before this Page 9 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4768/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2024 undefined Court, shall be sent back forthwith to the concerned tribunal.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) DIWAKAR SHUKLA Page 10 of 10 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 05 22:55:19 IST 2024