Gujarat High Court
Hansaben Bhavjibhai Thakore vs Rambhai Mulabhai Rajgor Savani on 12 August, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1810 of 2013
==========================================================
HANSABEN BHAVJIBHAI THAKORE & ORS.
Versus
RAMBHAI MULABHAI RAJGOR SAVANI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PARESH M DARJI(3700) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
for the Defendant(s) No. 6
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 6
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,4,5
UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 12/08/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellants - claimants, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 01.12.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Ahmedabad (Rural) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.1317 of 1995, by which the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,93,000/- with 7.5% per annum interest to the claimant/s, holding opponent Nos.1 to 2 as well as opponent Nos.4 to 6 to the extent of 50:50 respectively.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
2.1 On 19.04.1995, the deceased Bhavjibhai was coming from Jamnagar to Ahmedabad in the Jeep of opponent No.5 bearing No.GRG 2833 and the opponent No.4' being driver of the said Jeep was driving the Jeep in a moderate speed and on the left side of the Page 1 of 8 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024 undefined road and when the Jeep was passing near Rajiv Smruti Van on Jamnagar Rajkot road at that time one truck of the ownership of opponent No.2 bearing No.G.J. 10 T 8144 being driven by opponent No.1 in full speed and in a rash and negligent manner came on wrong side and dashed with the driver side of the Jeep due to the deceased has sustained serious injuries and ultimately died. The petitioners have stated that the deceased was doing agriculture work and earning Rs.2000/- per month. Therefore, the petitioners have claimed compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- under all heads.
2.2 After considering the documentary as well as oral evidence and submissions made at the bar, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition by awarding compensation as noted above.
2.3 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the present appeal is preferred by the claimant for enhancement.
3. Learned advocate the appellant/s - claimant/s has submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not properly calculating the amount of compensation. It is submitted that amount of award is on lower side as the Tribunal has not properly considered the various aspects; like prospective income of the deceased, loss of consortium, funeral expenses and loss of estate, deduction towards personal expenses, multiplier, and family circumstances, etc. It is submitted that the Tribunal has rightly considered the monthly income of the deceased Rs.1,500/- after considering the material available on the record and taking into account the nature of work of the deceased. It is further submitted that looking to the age of the deceased and keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Page 2 of 8 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024 undefined case of National Insurance Company Limited versus Pranay Shethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% income should be added towards prospective income of the deceased. Furthermore, it is submitted that the deduction towards personal expenses should be 1/4th, which the Tribunal has committed error in considering 1/3. He has submitted that in view the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the Sarla Verma versus Delhi Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, multiplier should be 17, which the Tribunal has committed error in considering the multiplier of 15. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error by awarding meager compensation under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, which should be more in view of decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of : (i) Magma General Insurance Company Limited versus Nanu Ram and others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 (ii) New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Somwati and others, reported in 2020 (9) SCC 644 and (iii) United India Insurance Co. Ltd., versus Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780. It is further submitted that the deceased was married and therefore, he has left the dependents in the family behind him. Therefore, the Tribunal has committed error by not properly awarding compensation under the head of loss of consortium. It is submitted that under other heads except above, the Tribunal has rightly considered the amount of compensation. It is submitted that the compensation is required to be enhanced by modifying the award impugned accordingly and this appeal may be allowed.
4. Per contra, learned advocate for contesting respondent No.3 - insurance company has submitted that the impugned judgment and Page 3 of 8 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024 undefined award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper. The Tribunal has rightly considered the income of the deceased. It is submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error by adding prospective income on higher side. It is also submitted that under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, the Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation. It is also submitted that under the head of loss of consortium, the Tribunal has considered proper compensation. However, from the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant/s that the Tribunal has committed certain errors, on this aspect, learned advocates for the respondent/s has submitted that if this Court feels that there is some error in calculation of the amount in view of settled position of law, in awarding compensation by the Tribunal, then the Court may pass appropriate order, in the interest of justice. It is submitted that this appeal may be dismissed and no interference be made by this Court.
5. It is noteworthy to mention that the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which gives paramount importance to the concept of 'just and fair' compensation. It is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the object of providing relief to the victims or their families. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with the concept of 'just compensation' which ought to be determined on the foundation of fairness, reasonableness and equitability. Although such determination can never be arithmetically exact or perfect, an endeavor should be made by the Court to award just and fair compensation irrespective of the amount claimed by the claimant/s. At the outset, I have considering the decision cited at the bar by learned advocate for the appellant. The judgments cited at the bar by learned advocate for the appellant is helpful to the facts of the Page 4 of 8 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024 undefined present case.
6.1 I have considered the submissions made by the rival parties. I have perused the record and proceedings of the Tribunal. I have gone through the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. It is noted that the claimant has by and large claimed enhancement towards prospective income of the deceased, loss of consortium, funeral expenses and loss of estate, deduction towards personal expenses, multiplier, and family circumstances, etc. It transpires that the Tribunal has rightly considered the monthly income of the injured Rs.1,500/- after considering the material available on the record and taking into account the nature of work of the injured. Furthermore, looking to the age of the deceased at the time of accident, i.e. 22 years and considering the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Shethi (supra), 40% rise should be added as prospective income. Therefore, it would come to Rs.2,100/- per month income of the deceased. Further, considering the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra) and Pranay Shethi (supra), 1/4 would be the deduction towards personal expense. Therefore, it would come to Rs.1,575/- per month multiplied by 12 months (annual income) and further multiplied by 17 multiplier keeping in view the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), it would come to Rs.3,21,300/- as loss of dependency benefits, which should be awarded by the Tribunal.
6.2 Further, under the head of loss of consortium, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- only, which should be on higher side. It is not in dispute that there are four dependents in the family. In view of the Page 5 of 8 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024 undefined decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of : (i) Magma General Insurance Company Limited versus Nanu Ram and others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 (ii) New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Somwati and others, reported in 2020 (9) SCC 644 and (iii) United India Insurance Co. Ltd., versus Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780, under the head of loss of consortium, Rs.48,400/- each (Rs.40,000/- and rise of 10%) would be proper to award, therefore, Rs.48,400/- x 4 dependents = Rs.1,93,600/- would be the compensation under the head of loss of consortium.
6.3 Further, under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, if we award Rs.18,150/- each, would be the just and proper compensation, considering the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra). Furthermore, under other heads except the above, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is not disputed by learned advocate for the appellant/s, otherwise also, the Tribunal has rightly considered the amount under those heads.
6.4 Therefore, total compensation would be as under, which the claimant/s is/are entitled to get.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Loss of dependency benefits 3,21,300/-
Loss of estate 18,150/-
Funeral expenses 18,150/-
Loss of consortium 1,93,600/-
Page 6 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024
undefined
Total... 5,51,200/-
Less : Amount which is already 2,93,000/-
awarded
Additional amount which is 2,58,200/-
awarded
7. Therefore, I hold that the claimant/s are entitled to get the total amount of compensation of Rs.5,51,200/- with 7.5% p.a. interest from the date of filing the claim petition till its realisation, which would meet the ends of justice. Rest of the direction(s) of the Tribunal shall remain same. The Tribunal has already awarded Rs.2,93,000/- and, therefore, remaining amount of Rs.2,58,200/- would be the enhanced amount of compensation payable to the claimant/s.
8. For the reasons recorded above, the following order is passed.
8.1 The present appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
8.2 The impugned judgment and award dated 01.12.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Ahmedabad (Rural) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.1317 of 1995 is modified to the aforesaid extent.
8.3 The respondent No.6 - Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount Rs.2,58,200/- with 7.5% p.a. interest from the date of claim petition till its realisation before the concerned Tribunal, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order, and thereafter recover 50% of the entire Page 7 of 8 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1810/2013 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2024 undefined awarded amount from the other opponents as per the order of the Tribunal.
8.4 The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded amount lying in the FDR and/or with the Tribunal, with accrued interest thereon, if any, to the claimant/s, by account payee cheque / NEFT / RTGS, after proper verification and after following due procedure.
8.5 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
8.6 Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) DIWAKAR SHUKLA Page 8 of 8 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 19 20:32:49 IST 2024