Back
2023 Supreme(Guj) 326
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, JJ.
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
RAMDIN RAMNAVAZ KORI – Respondent
First Appeal No. 2594 of 2015
Decided On : 23-02-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : VIBHUTI NANAVATI.
For the Respondent: HIREN M. MODI.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation entitlement for the claimants under different heads in a motor accident claim, based on relevant legal provisions and court decisions.
Headnote:
Compensation - Motor Accident Claims - Sarla Verma and Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Satinder Kaur alias Satwinder Kaur and Others, AIR 2020 SC 3076, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Somwati and Others, (2020) 9 SCC 644
Fact of the Case:
The appeal was filed by the appellant, The New India Assurance Company Limited, challenging the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The deceased sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the accidental injuries in a road accident. The appellant contested the compensation amount awarded to the original claimants.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the original claimants were entitled to compensation under different heads, including future loss of income, loss of estate, consortium, and funeral expenses. The court also determined the amount to be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company.
Issues: The issues involved the determination of compensation for the deceased's future loss of income, loss of estate, consortium, and funeral expenses, as well as the refund amount to the Insurance Company.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the decisions of the Apex Court in various cases to determine the compensation entitlement of the original claimants under different heads.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed in part, and the appellant-Insurance Company was entitled to a refund of Rs.3,35,000. The court ordered the refund and disbursement of the remaining amount to the original claimants.
JUDGMENT :
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.
1. The present First Appeal is filed by the appellant-The New India Assurance Company Limited challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 10/09/2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Bhavnagar (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 622 of 2007, by which, the learned Tribunal has held and directed the original opponent no. 3 - Insurance Company to pay the compensation to the original claimants.
2. The brief facts leading to the present appeal are that, the unfortunate incident took place on 18/07/2007 at about 2.45 p.m. in noon hours on the road proceeding towards Shyamdhaam, Yogi-Chokdi, Opp. Panchvati society in Surat City. That on the day of incident, the deceased-Laljibhai Kanjibhai Gidhani was going on his Hero-Honda Motorcycle bearing registration No. GJ-5-DF-4235 by running it as moderate speed following the traffic rules. When he approached the place of accident, the respondent No. 1 came from opposite side by driving his Tata Tempo bearing registration No. GJ-5-U-3558 in rash and negligent manner, in full speed, violating the traffic rules, in wrong side and dashed it with the Motorcycle of the deceased. As a result thereof, the deceased sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the said accidental injuries.
3. Heard Mr.Vibhuti Nanavati, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company and Mr.Hiren M. Modi, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents-original claimants.
4. Mr.Vibhuti Nanavati, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company submitted that the respondents-original claimants have neither produced any documentary evidence with regard to the actual income of the deceased nor they have produced anything on record to show that the deceased was also having income out of the tuition classes run by him. Mr.Nanavati submitted that the respondents-original claimants have also not examined the persons who had issued the certificates in favour of the deceased, and therefore, the respondents-original claimants have failed to produce any cogent documentary evidence on record to prove the steady income of the deceased. He further submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error by awarding the amount of compensation on higher side and on all other grounds raised in the memo of appeal, the present appeal has been filed.
5. Per contra, Mr.Hiren M. Modi the learned counsel appearing for the original claimants emphasized that the claimants have produced the certificate of income issued by the Principal of the School wherein the deceased was serving as a Teacher. He submitted that atleast since the deceased was running the tuition classes, his income is required to be presumed from the tuition classes, however, he candidly submitted that the claimants have not examined the persons who have issued the income certificates. He further submitted that the deceased was serving as a teacher in a private school and he was a scholar in Science stream. He submitted that the deceased was a subject teacher and was also giving tuition to the students.
6. We Have considered the averments made in the appeal, submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the sides and considered the facts of the case and perused the record and proceedings. It is true that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 26 years only i.e. below 40 years and therefore, 50% rise in the future prospective income is to be considered. Moreover, the legal heirs of the deceased are six in number and therefore, instead of 1/3, deduction of 1/4 is required to be adopted. Considering the fact that the deceased was serving as a teacher in a private school and he was a scholar in Science stream and was giving tuition to students also, the Tribunal has rightly considered the income of the deceased at Rs.8,00
