Allowed

Laxmiben Gagubhai Danger(Ahir) Wd/O Late Gagubhai Veljibhai Danger(Ahir) v. Vinesh Dayabhai Chauhan

Gujarat HC20 Jun 2018FA/176/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this first appeal, the High Court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for a vehicular accident death. Applying the Pranay Sethi principle, the Court added 40% increase for prospective future income and adjusted dependency calculations, ordering the insurance company to deposit the additional amount.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 10,30,000; additional amount to be deposited by the insurance company with 50% released immediately and 50% released after three years.

Laxmiben Gagubhai Danger(Ahir) Wd/O Late Gagubhai… — Motor Accident Claims | Gujarat HC (2018)

¶1

C/FA/176/2018 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 176 of 2018

¶4

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

¶5

LAXMIBEN GAGUBHAI DANGER(AHIR) WD/O LATE GAGUBHAI VELJIBHAI DANGER(AHIR)

¶6

Versus VINESH DAYABHAI CHAUHAN

¶7

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

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2,3,4 MR SUNIL B PARIKH(582) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 3 MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 6 NOTICE SERVED(4) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1,2,4,5

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and

¶12

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

¶13

Date : 20/06/2018

¶14

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

¶15

1. Notice for final disposal having been issued, we

¶16

have heard learned advocates for the parties finally.

¶17

2.This appeal is filed by the original claimants
seeking enhancement in the compensation awarded by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kachchh, vide
impugned judgment and award dated 29.08.2017.
Deceased Gagubhai Danger expired in a vehicular
accident which took place on 29.07.2000. The
claimants are his widow, minor daughter and aged
mother besides elder brother of the deceased. Before

¶18

the Claims Tribunal, the claimants contended that the

¶19

Page 1 of 5

¶20

C/FA/176/2018 ORDER

¶21

deceased was engaged in salt trading business. He
also had agricultural income. The claimants examined
one Jayesh P. Mehta at exh.89 who was a tax
consultant. He produced the income tax returns filed
on behalf of the deceased, in which, for the
assessment year 1999-2000, his total income was shown
at Rs.68,488/-. This comprised of income from

¶22

business at Rs.44,378/-and agricultural income of
Rs.24,110/-. The Tribunal, however, scaled down this
income to Rs.5,000/- in all. The Tribunal believed

¶23

that the income of the deceased from business at
Rs.4,000/- and added Rs.1,000/- towards agricultural
operations. The age of the deceased was proved to be
27 years. Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 17 to the

¶24

loss of dependency benefit of Rs.3750/- per month
taken after reducing 1/4th of the monthly income for
the personal expenditure of the deceased. To this
figure, the Tribunal added Rs.30,000/- for loss of
estate, Rs.20,000/- for consortium and Rs.10,000/-
towards funeral expenses. A further sum of

¶25

Rs.10,000/- was awarded for mental shock and
sufferings.

¶26

3. Counsel for the claimants submitted that the

¶27

Page 2 of 5

¶28

C/FA/176/2018 ORDER

¶29

Tribunal committed an error in believing the income
of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- at the time of the
accident and further erred in not granting any rise
for the future.

¶30

4.On the other hand, learned advocates for the
insurance companies pointed out that the brother of
the deceased was aged about 34 years on the date of
accident and was shown to be serving. He therefore
cannot be stated to be his dependent.

¶31

5.The main question in appeal is regarding quantum

¶32

of compensation. Age of the deceased is not in
dispute. With respect to income, we adopt the figure
of Rs.5,000/- taken by the Tribunal. There is no
further scope for revision since the Tribunal has
taken the income from business as stated by the
witness of the claimant. In relation to the

¶33

agricultural income, it has come on record that the
claimant was a joint owner of the agricultural land.
The Tribunal, however, committed an error in not
granting any rise for the future. In view of the
judgment of the Supreme Court in case of National
Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Ors.

¶34

Page 3 of 5

¶35

C/FA/176/2018 ORDER

¶36

reported in 2017 (3) GLR 536 there would be 40%
increase on the current income. The prospective
income of the deceased would be Rs.7,000/-. 1/3rd
thereof would be set apart for his personal
expenditure since eliminating the brother who was
elder to him and who was stated to be serving, cannot
be stated to be his dependent. This would leave a
net of Rs.4,666/- (rounded of to Rs.4,700/-) for the
benefit of the claimants. Adopting multiplier of 17,
the loss of dependency benefit would come to
Rs.9,58,800/-. We add a further sum of Rs.70,000/-
under different conventional heads making a gross of
Rs.10,28,800/- (rounded off to Rs.10,30,000/-) to be
paid to the claimants by way of total compensation.

¶37

6.First Appeal is allowed to the above limited
extent. Additional compensation shall be deposited
by the concerned insurance company before the Claims
Tribunal latest by 31.07.2018. 50% of such amount
may be disburse in favour of the claimants. Remaining
50% amount may be deposited for a period of three
years in any nationalized bank. Upon maturity of
such deposits, the remaining amount shall also be
released in favour of the claimants.

¶38

Page 4 of 5

¶39

C/FA/176/2018 ORDER

¶40

7. First Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

¶41

(AKIL KURESHI, J)

¶42

(B.N. KARIA, J)

¶43

ANKIT SHAH

¶44

Page 5 of 5

Laxmiben Gagubhai Danger(Ahir) Wd/O Late Gagubhai Veljibhai Danger(Ahir) v. Vinesh Dayabhai Chauhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmiben Gagubhai Danger(Ahir) Wd/O Late Gagubhai Veljibhai Danger(Ahir) v. Vinesh Dayabhai Chauhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maulikkumar Shaileshbhai Pandya Vs Ashaben Maulikkumar Pandya

Raginiben Mahendrabhai Rana Vs State Election Commissioner

Icici Lombard General Insurance Vs Aashiyana Wd/O Alihusen Pandhara Heirs of Late Alihusen Nadibax Pandhara

Ismail Ahmad Dashu Vs Ibrahimbhai Kasambhai Dashu

Hamilton Housewares Pvt. Ltd., Vs Union of India

M/S Naitik Enterprise Vs Union of India