Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Hasam Heru Hingorja vs Sanjaygiri Shantagiri Gusai & 4 Defendants

High Court Of Gujarat|19 April, 2012
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 28.07.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ( Main), Kachh at Bhuj in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 594 of 1991 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.244000/­ ( Rs. 135000/­ towards future loss of income + Rs. 35000/­ towards medical expenses+ Rs.15000/­ towards attendant charges + Rs. 25000/­ towards pain, shock and suffering + Rs. 10000/­ towards loss of future enjoyment + Rs. 5000/­ towards special diet + Rs. 4000/­ towards transportation charges + Rs. 15000/­ towards actual loss of income) with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till the deposit with proportionate costs.
2.0 On 03.07.1991, the claimant was travelling as Cleaner in the truck bearing No. GTY­6328. At about 3.15 hours, in the morning when the truck reached near railway crossing situated near village Bhujodi, one luxury bus bearing No. GTY­8660 came from the opposite direction with excessive speed and dashed with the truck. The claimant sustained injuries. He therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by common judgment and award dated 28.07.1999 awarded a sum of Rs.244000/­. Hence the present appeal has been filed at the instance of the claimant for enhancement.
3.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that though it is proved on record that the claimant was under treatment from 03.07.1991 till 17.05.1997, the learned Tribunal has erred in considering only 2 years as period of actual loss of income; that amount of Rs. 25000/­ towards pain, shock and suffering is on lower side; that an amount of Rs. 10000/­ towards loss of enjoyment of life is on lower side. It should be 20000/­. He further submitted that the there is mistake in calculation of future loss of income considering Rs. 7500/­ as loss of earning capacity.
4.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and no interference is required to be warranted.
5.0 Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the documents on record.
6.0 As far as income is concerned, the learned Tribunal by considering the entire facts and circumstance of the case the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the prospective income of Rs. 1200/­ per month. Looking to the evidence by doctor, who has given certificate of permanent partial disability, it was admitted that the claimant can do some work except labour work. Therefore, it cannot be said that the claimant is not able to do any work or he is not able to earn anything. However, looking to the fact that the claimant was doing work of labour, his earning capacity has considerably decreased and therefore, at least 60% loss of earning capacity should be assessed and compensation should be awarded considering the loss of earning capacity. However,the learned Tribunal has committed error in calculation of future loss of income. By considering prospective income of Rs. 1200/­ and 60% loss of earning capacity, the monthly loss would come to Rs. 720/­ and annual loss would come to Rs. 8640/­. By applying multiplier of 18 considering the age of the claimant at 21 years at the time of accident as per the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, the future loss of income would come to Rs.1,55520/­. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 135000/­ which is on lower side.
7.0 The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10000/­ towards the loss of enjoyment of life. In my view, Rs. 20000/­ should be awarded for loss of future enjoyment of married life because the claimant was unmarried. Moreover, the claimant was under treatment from 03.07.1991 till 17.05.199 and he had to take medicines at Jamnagar, Baroda, Ahmedbad, Bhuj, etc. for two years. Therefore, actual loss of Rs.15000/­ is on lower side. Hence, interest of justice would be met by awarding Rs.18000/­ towards the actual loss of income.
8.0 In the result, it is held that the claimant is entitled to compensation in sum of Rs. 277520/­[ Rs. 155520/­ towards future loss of income + Rs. 35000/­ towards medical expenses+ Rs.15000/­ towards attendant charges + Rs. 25000/­ towards pain, shock and suffering + Rs. 20000/­ towards loss of future enjoyment + Rs. 5000/­ towards special diet + Rs.
4000/­ towards transportation charges + Rs. 18000/­ towards actual loss of income ]. The learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.244000/­ as total compensation. Accordingly it is held that a further sum of Rs. 33520/­ ( Rs. 277520/­ Rs. 244000/­) shall be paid to the appellant in addition to the amount already awarded to him by the Tribunal. However, the interest on this additional amount will be only 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realization. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Hasam Heru Hingorja vs Sanjaygiri Shantagiri Gusai & 4 Defendants

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
19 April, 2012
Judges
  • Ks Jhaveri
Advocates
  • Mr Suresh M Shah