Partly allowed

Sister of Charity of St.Anni Navjivan Leprosy Hospital v. Arifbhai B Kapadia Decd.Thro' Heirs Dilsadben Arifbhai & 5

Gujarat HC3 Feb 2012FA/550/1997

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award, the High Court modified the compensation due to the respondents. The court corrected the income assessment from Rs.48,000 to Rs.42,000 based on taxable income, adjusted the multiplier, and reduced the interest rate from 15% to 12% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Compensation modified to Rs. 3,92,500 with interest at 12% per annum; excess of Rs. 1,25,650 refunded to the appellant.

Sister of Charity of St.Anni Navjivan Leprosy Hospital… — Motor Accident Claims | Gujarat HC (2012)

¶1

FA/550/1997

¶2

1/5

¶3

JUDGMENT

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶5

FIRST APPEAL No. 550 of 1997

¶6

For Approval and Signature:

¶7

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

¶8

=========================================================

¶9

1^{Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed}

¶10

to see the judgment ?

¶11

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶12

3^{Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of} the judgment ?

¶13

Whether this case involves a substantial question

¶14

4 of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?

¶15

5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?

¶16

=========================================================

¶17

SISTER OF CHARITY OF ST.ANNI NAVJIVAN LEPROSY HOSPITAL

¶18

& 1 - Appellant(s)

¶19

Versus

¶20

DILSADBEN ARIFBHAI & 1 - Defendant(s)

¶21

=========================================================

¶22

Appearance :

¶23

MR RAJNI H MEHTA for Appellant(s) : 1 - 2. None for Defendant(s) : 1, 1.2.2,1.2.3 MR SATYEN B RAWAL for Defendant(s) : 1.2.1, 1.2.4,1.2.5 NOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 1.2.6 - 2.

¶24

=========================================================

¶25

CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

¶26

Date : 03/02/2012

¶27

FA/550/1997

¶28

2/5

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 17.10.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [Main] Bhavnagar in M.A.C.P. No. 316 of 1994, whereby the claim petition was partly allowed and the original claimants were awarded total compensation of Rs.5,18,000/- along with proportionate costs and interest @ 15% per annum from the date of the application till its realization.

¶32

The facts in brief are that on 15.03.1994 at around 1045 hours, while Arifbhai and his friend were going on a Scooter bearing no. GJ-4-B-7089, at a particular place, the driver of the Ambulance bearing no. GJ-4-9816, in a rash and negligent manner dashed with the scooter, as a result of which, Arifbhai sustained severe bodily injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The legal heirs of the deceased, filed claim petition, which came to be partly allowed, by way of the impugned award. Being aggrieved by the said award, the appellant Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal.

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. It has been mainly contended on behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the annual income at Rs.48,000/-. It has been contended on behalf of the

¶34

FA/550/1997

¶35

3/5

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

appellant-Insurance Company that the Tribunal erred in appreciating the evidence on record in its proper perspective and awarded compensation, which is not in consonance with the law on the subject.

¶38

Before the Tribunal, it was the specific case of respondent-original claimant that he was earning Rs.5,000/- to Rs.7,000/- per month towards salary and from other misc. work. The claimant had produced documentary evidence vide Exhibits – 34 & 38 to prove his income. However, while awarding compensation, the Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs.4,000/-, which is contrary to the evidence on record. The taxable income for the relevant year was Rs.28,000/-. No documentary evidence in the form of Income-tax Return was produced on record by the claimant. Under such circumstance, the Tribunal ought not to have assessed his monthly income at Rs.4,000/-. In my opinion, it would be just and appropriate to assess the annual income of the claimant at Rs.28,000/-, which is the taxable income limit for the relevant year in which the accident occurred.

¶39

By considering the annual income at Rs.28,000/- and by adopting the principle of doubling the income and then taking its average, as laid down by the Apex Court in its recent decision, the annual income would come to Rs.42000/-. The total number of dependents are five, therefore, 1/4th amount is required to be

¶40

FA/550/1997

¶41

4/5

¶42

JUDGMENT

¶43

deducted, which would come to Rs.31,500/-. Instead of 16, the multiplier would be 17 in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation & anr, reported in (2009) 6 S.C.C. 121. Hence, the total income would come to (31,500 X 17) Rs.5,35,500. So far as the income under the head of funeral expenses is concerned, no amount is awarded under the said head. Hence, an amount of Rs.5,000/- is required to be granted towards the funeral expenses. Thus, the claimants shall be entitled total compensation of Rs.5,60,500/and after deducting the contributory negligence of 70%, the claimants shall be entitled to compensation of Rs.3,92,350/. However, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.5,18,000/-. Hence, excess amount of Rs.1,25,650/- is required to be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company.

¶44

So far as compensation awarded under the other heads are concerned, I find the same to be just and appropriate. However, the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and also contrary to the prevailing law on the subject. In my opinion, the appropriate rate of interest would be 12% per annum instead of 15% per annum considering the present day scenario. Hence, the impugned award passed by the Tribunal is required to be modified accordingly.

¶45

For the foregoing reasons, appeal is is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is

¶46

FA/550/1997

¶47

5/5

¶48

JUDGMENT

¶49

modified to the extent that the original claimant shall be entitled for compensation of Rs. 3,92,500/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The excess amount of Rs.1,25,650/- shall be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

¶50

/phalguni/

Sister of Charity of St.Anni Navjivan Leprosy Hospital v. Arifbhai B Kapadia Decd.Thro' Heirs Dilsadben Arifbhai & 5

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sister of Charity of St.Anni Navjivan Leprosy Hospital v. Arifbhai B Kapadia Decd.Thro' Heirs Dilsadben Arifbhai & 5

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gagusha Kamalsha Fakir Vs Lalji Karshanbhai Chudasama

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Shantaben W/O Vahjibhai Nathu-Bhai

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Shantiben Bijal Barariya,Wd/O Decd,Bijal Kheta

Juvansing Bhimsinh Jadeja Vs Jayaben S Mistry

Juvansing Bhimsinh Jadeja Vs Nanduben Jodhabhai Koli

Juvansing Bhimsinh Jadeja Vs Bharat S Mistry