AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.D. Shah, J.—These appeals are filed by the National Insurance Company Ltd. under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common judgment and award dated 15-9-2006 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Aux.), FTC No. 2, Godhra, in MACP Nos. 1999 of 2004 and 2000 of 2004 only on the point of quantum. All these claim petitions arise out of the same accident and both the claim petitions were decided by common judgment and award and, therefore, both these appeals are being decided by this common judgment.
Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that the Tribunal has committed error in determining income of the deceased Balvantbhai at Rs. 2500/- and that of deceased Kantaben at Rs. 1500/- per month in calculating the amount under the head of loss of dependency of the deceased though there are no evidences on record. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has also committed error in not fastening contributory negligence on the part of the deceased Balvantbhai, who was driving the motor cycle at the relevant time though there is documentary evidence on record.
This court has gone through the impugned common judgment and award together with oral and documentary evidence including FIR, panchnama and other evidence.
It appears from the record that the deceased Balvantbhai was driving motor cycle on the date of accident and his wife Kantaben was sitting as a pillion rider and as accident took place between jeep and motor cycle, both of them lost their lives and hence, heirs of the deceased filed the claim petitions. Driver of the jeep or its owner though duly served with notice did not file any written statement nor did they appear before the Court and hence, the Tribunal has not committed any error in holding that accident was caused due to negligence of driver of the offending vehicle.
On the aspect of quantum, the incident took place in the year 2004. It has come on evidence that deceased Balvantbhai an agriculturist and was himself cultivating the land. He was having tractor in his name and relevant documents in this regard are also produced and, therefore, no error is committed by the Tribunal in considering the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 2500/- and, therefore, just and adequate compensation has been awarded as far as the death of deceased Balvantbhai is concerned. As far as the death of deceased Kantaben is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed Rs. 1500/- as her monthly income and, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the Tribunal has not committed error in calculating compensation on the basis of Rs. 1500/- as monthly income of the deceased. Suitable multiplier is also applied by the Tribunal in both the cases considering the age of the deceased and, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, in both the claim petitions, the Tribunal has awarded just and adequate compensation.
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the learned Tribunal in the conclusions arrived at by the learned Tribunal requiring interference by this Court in these appeals. Both these appeals are therefore required to be dismissed.
Both these appeals are dismissed.
Office to send back the records and proceedings, if any, forthwith. Office to place a copy of this judgment in each appeal.