AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.J. Thaker, J.—By way of this appeal, the appellants have challenged the impugned judgment and award dated 21.8.2008 passed by the MAC (Aux.) Tribunal, Court No. 14, Ahmedabad in MAC Petition No. 344/2002, whereby, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 4,03,875/-. The facts of the present appeal is such that the daughter of the appellants No. 1 and 2 namely Rinkuben Navnitbhai Shah, on dated 27.11.2001 was going on the Kinetic Honda bearing No. GJ-1-AH-5207 from Usmanpura to Udbhav Design Advertising Institute situated at Fatehpura, near Paldi Post Office. That she was stopped at traffic signal, at that time, the respondent No. 1 - driver of ST bus was also stopped at the traffic signal at the Income tax Circle and was driving the ST Bus bearing registration No. GJ-18-V-1385. That when the signal has been green, at that time, the respondent No. 1 started his bus in excessive speed and took the sharp turn without showing his right or left side and in such area where the traffic is very heavy even than the respondent No. 1 took off his bus in excessive speed and dashed with the deceased and she fell down on the road and the head of the deceased got crushed in the rear wheel (on driver side) of the bus and the deceased died on the spot.
Therefore, the appellants have prayed the compensation for unnatural death and untimely death against the present respondent by way of filing a petition before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Ahmedabad and prayed for Rs. 6,00,000/-. However, the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition of the appellants and, therefore, the present appeal.
Learned advocate for the appellants has submitted that the deceased ought not to have been attributed with any contributory negligence. The deceased was having master degree in Organic Chemistry and she was also software engineer. Her income ought to have been considered at Rs. 10,000/-. The learned advocate therefore, submitted that the amount of compensation be enhanced and award be modified.
I have perused the judgment and award and the documents on record. It goes without saying that the award is on the lower side. The learned Tribunal did not consider the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, and did not add the future income. The negligence which is attributed to the deceased is not borne out from the evidence on record. The driver of the ST bus has not stepped into the witness box. The documentary evidence which are produced on record, are as under:
Complaint Ex. 35
Panchnama of site of the accident Ex. 36
Inquest panchnama Ex. 37
PM certificate Ex. 38
PM Note of deceased Ex. 39 &
Salary certificate by Udbhav Design Advertising Ex. 34.
In view of the above evidence, the deceased cannot be attributed any negligence. Hence, the issue of negligence is answered in favour of the appellants and against the ST Corporation. This takes me to the issue of income of the deceased. The monthly income of the deceased is considered to be Rs. 5000/-, to which, future prospective income of 50% will have to be added, therefore, Rs. 2500/- requires to be added which comes to Rs. 7500/-. From that, as she was unmarried, 1/2 will have to be deducted, but round amount, the net figure would be Rs. 4000/-. Hence the difference would come to Rs. 1000 x 12 x 11 = 1,32,000/-. Therefore the impugned award is modified. The difference of Rs. 1,32,000/- towards the future loss of income, Rs. 10,000/- towards love and affection and the difference of 25% which was deducted by the learned Tribunal will have to be deposited by the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation - respondent No. 2 herein, within a period of eight weeks from today with interest at the rate of 7.5%, failing which, the rate of interest would be 9%. The appeal is partly allowed.