IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.G. URAIZEE, J.
Ilaba Bhimdevsinh Gohil - Appellant
Versus
Ashokbhai Ghelabhai Dabhi - Defendant
R/First Appeal No. 1007 Of 2021
Decided On : 07-09-2021
Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation Enhancement - Section 173 of MV Act - [Sections 279, 304(A) of Indian Penal Code, Sections 184, 177 of MV Act] - The court discussed the assessment of monthly income, prospective income, and future loss, and modified the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal was filed for enhancement of compensation awarded to the claimants under a judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The deceased was hit by a truck and the claimants sought compensation for the loss.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Tribunal had adopted a conservative approach in assessing the monthly income of the deceased and in calculating the prospective income. It modified the compensation awarded to the claimants, enhancing it to Rs. 12,98,500/- and awarded additional compensation with interest.
Issues: Assessment of monthly income, prospective income, and future loss; Enhancement of compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Tribunal had erred in assessing the monthly income and prospective income, and therefore modified the compensation awarded to the claimants.
Final Decision: The present appeal was allowed, and the impugned judgment and award were modified. The claimants were held entitled to Rs. 12,98,500/- as total compensation in place of Rs.9,52,000/- and were awarded additional compensation with interest.
ORDER :
1. Present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act for short) is preferred by the appellants – original claimants for enhancement of compensation awarded to them under judgment and award dated 9.1.2020 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), District Bhavnagar in M.A.C.P. No. 349 of 2016.
2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 10.9.2016 at about 3 p.m., the deceased Bhimdevsinh Gohil had parked his motorcycle near his field and was standing near his motorcycle. At that time, the driver of the offending truck bearing registration No. GJ-14X-1010 came from his behind at very high and excessive speed in rash and negligent manner and lost control over the steering, as a result, the truck dashed with the deceased Bhimdevsinh Gohil causing serious injuries. The deceased Bhimdevsinh Gohil died on the spot as a consequence of serious injury. The offence punishable under Sections 279, 304(A) of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 184, 177 of M.V. Act came to be registered with Ghogha Police Station vide I-C.R. No. 40 of 2016 against the respondent No.1 the driver of the offending truck.
2.1 The claimants being legal heirs of the deceased Bhimdevsinh Gohil filed M.A.C.P. No. 349 of 2016 against the respondent No.1 driver and insurance company respectively of the offending truck bearing registration No. GJ-14X-1010 to recover a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- with 12% interest and cost.
2.2 The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 did not enter their appearance to contest the claim petition, whereas the respondent No.3 insurance company of the offending truck resisted the claim petition by filing written statement Exh.21. The Tribunal after considering ocular and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, partly allowed the claim petition and directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.9,52,000/- with 9% interest jointly and severally to the claimants from the date of the petition till payment. The appellants, being aggrieved by the quantum of the compensation, have preferred present appeal for enhancement of the compensation.
3. With the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, present appeal is taken up for final disposal as the issue involved in the appeal moves in narrow compass.
4. I have heard Mr. Nishit A. Bhalodi, learned advocate for the appellants, Mr. Rudra V. Trivedi, learned advocate for Mr. Bhaumik Dholariya, learned advocate the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Alkesh N. Shah, learned advocate for the respondent no.3 insurance company.
5. Mr. Bhalodi, learned advocate for the appellants submits that the deceased was having his own agricultural land and was also having cattle. He submits that the deceased was earning Rs.75,000/- per year after meeting of the expenses from his agricultural activity and was also earning good amount by selling milk. He, therefore, submits that as per the say of the appellants, the deceased was earning around Rs.10,000/- per month. However, Tribunal has taken very conservative view in assessing monthly income as Rs.5,000/- per month. He, submits that the Tribunal ought to have at least assessed Rs.7,800/- as monthly income of the deceased. He, further submits that he does not press ground B and C raised in the memo of present appeal. He, submits that the compensation under the head of prospective income and future loss of income needs to be revised and the final compensation needs to be enhanced accordingly.
6. Mr. Alkesh Shah, learned advocate for the respondent No.3 – insurance company submits that the monthly income of the deceased may be revised to Rs.7800/-. However, according to his submission the Tribunal has committed error in calculating prospective income @ 40% which should be 25% in view of the judgment in case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethy and others reported in 2017 ACJ 2700, as the deceased was self-employed and age of the decea
The main legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, particularly in relation to the assessment of monthly income, prospective income, and ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to award just compensation exceeding the claimed amount under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the need for a realistic appr....
The court modified the compensation assessment by considering future income prospects and family dependency as outlined under the Motor Vehicles Act.
The Motor Vehicles Act mandates that courts award just compensation, which can exceed claimed amounts, based on proper assessment of income and future prospects.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.