P. D. DESAI, R. J. SHAH, J.

( 1 ) THESE two cross appeals are directed against the same award made in a motor accident claim case and they can be conveniently disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) ). The accident giving rise to the claim occurred on 7/07/1977 at about 10 A. M. near village Tajpur on the Ahmedabad Khedbrahma road. Two vehicles were involved in the accident. One of the vehicles was a passenger bus bearing registration No. GTH. 5496 owned by the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (second respondent in First Appeal No. 1587 of 1979 ). The other vehicle was a motor truck bearing registration No. GTK. 2068 owned by one Ranchodbhai Visabhai Patel (third respondent in First Appeal No. 1587 of 1979 ). The deceased aged about 30 at the time of the accident was an employee of the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and he was at the material time on actual duty as a conductor on the passenger bus. It appears that the passenger bus was required to be taken in the reverse direction at the site of the accident and that the deceased had alighted from the bus in order to assist the driver while reversing the vehicle. While the vehicle was in the reverse motion the deceased was crushed between the vehicle and the motor truck which was parked on the side of the road. The deceased was removed to the Civil Hospital Ahmedabad where he died within a few hours.

( 3 ) ). The widow minor daughter father and mother of the deceased jointly instituted a claim petition against the driver and owner of the passenger bus and the driver and owner of the motor truck claiming damages in the sum of Rs. 80 0 The Tribunal which tried the claim petition awarded total compensation in the sum of Rs. 22 875 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the institution of the claim petition till realization and proportionate costs. Be it stated that though the operative part of the award does not contain a specific direction with regard to the award of interest and of costs the Tribunal has held in para. 23 of the award that the awarded amount must be paid with interest at the rate and for the period mentioned above and in para 24 the Tribunal has held that the claim was required to be allowed in part with proportionate costs. Under the circumstances the omission to give a specific direction with regard to the payment of interest and costs in the operative part of the award must be regarded as inconsequential and the concerned claimants must be taken to have been held entitled to interest and costs as specified in the award. The Tribunal found that the father was not entitled to any share in the compensation as he was not the heir of the deceased. The principal amount of compensation was therefore apportioned between the widow the minor daughter and mother as follows :rs. 10,000. . . widow. RS. 10,000. . . minor daughter. RS. 2,875. . . mother. RS. 22,875. . . total. ALTHOUGH there is an omission to give a specific direction in the ope rative part of the award with regard to the apportionment of the amount allowed as interest and costs on the awarded sum each one of the persons held entitled to a share in the compensation must be held to have been declared entitled to the proportionate interest and costs on the sum apportioned to her. The Tribunal held the driver and owner of the passenger bus (Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation) and the driver and owner of the truck jointly and severally liable to satisfy the award.

( 4 ) ). It might be stated at this stage that on the strength of the evidence on record the Tribunal had assessed damages at Rs. 51 500 the loss of dependency benefit/economic loss was computed at Rs. 48 0 on the basis of the annual dependency of Rs. 4800. 00 capitalized by the application of the multiplier of 10. To this was added a sum of Rs. 3000. 00for the loss of expectation of life and a sum of Rs. 500. 00for the expenses incurred on obsequial ceremonies. However the actual award came to be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document