USHABEN DHARMESHBHAI KAPADIYA Vs. DIVYESHBHAI SHARADCHANDRA SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present First Appeal, under Sec. 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant/s - original claimant/s, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dtd. 6/12/2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) Vadodara in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.1322 of 2011, by which the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.34,91,000.00 with 9% per annum interest to the claimant/s, holding Opponents of the vehicle in question, liable, jointly and severally.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are as under:

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Khan for Mr.Hakim for the appellant/s - claimant/s has submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not properly calculating the amount of compensation. He has submitted that the income of the deceased is not considered properly. He has given his calculation by submitting that the form no.16 is filed whereby his income is also declared for the assessment year and accordingly the income is required to be considered. He has submitted that amount of award is on lower side as the Tribunal has not properly considered the various aspects; like income of the deceased, prospective income, multiplier, medical expenses, loss of consortium etc. He has further submitted that looking to the age of the deceased and keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited versus Pranay Shethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 , 50% income should be added towards prospective income of the deceased. He has further submitted that the deceased was married and therefore, he has left the dependents in the family behind him. Therefore, the Tribunal has committed error by not properly awarding compensation under the head of loss of consortium. Further, he has submitted that the Tribunal has erred in deducting 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses. He has submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error by not properly applying the multiplier, which should be 17 keeping in view the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the Sarla Verma versus Delhi Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. He has also submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error by awarding meager compensation under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, which should be more in view of decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of : (i) Magma General Insurance Company Limited versus Nanu Ram and others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 (ii) New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Somwati and others, reported in 2020 (9) SCC 644 and (iii) United India Insurance Co. Ltd., versus Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780. He has submitted that the compensation is required to be enhanced atleast to the tune of Rs.15,00,000.00 by modifying the award impugned accordingly and this appeal may be allowed.