JILLA PANCHAYAT Vs. BABLIBEN DHIRUBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "Dhirubhai was killed in an accident by a road roller while he was walking alongwith the road with a bicycle in hand. The deceased was serving in Advance Mills, Ahmedabad, and the remuneration that he received ranged from Rs. 450/- to Rs. 570/- per month. The deceased was a young man, aged about 32 years, (in tbe post-mortem notes his age is estimated to be 35 years). He has left behind his widow and five minors. The Tribunal has estimated his average monthly income at Rs. 500/- and on that basis has come to the conclusion that he spent about Rs. 400/- per month on the family. Applying the mutliplier of 15, he came to the conclusion that the family would be entitled to Rs. 72,000/- by way of economic loss and Rs. 1,000/- for funeral expenses. For loss of expectation of life, consortium, etc. another Rs. 27,000/-came to be estimated and thus the Tribunal reached the figure of Rs. 1 lakh and holding the deceased responsible to the extent of 40 per cent, sliced it down to Rs. 60,000/- the figure to which the claims was reduced.

(2.) MR . D.D. Vyas, the learned advocate for the appellant, submitted that even though the evidence disclosed that the deceased spent Rs. 300/- per month on the family, the Tribunal had estimated the loss on the basis of Rs. 400/- per month and had granted an exorbitant amount towards loss of expectation of life etc. It is indeed true that in the course of evidence it was mentioned that the deceased was spending Rs. 300/- per month on the family but one cannot lose sight of the fact that in course of time his earnings would have gone up and he would have contributed a larger amount. As regards the award of Rs. 27,000/- for loss of expectation of life, consortium, etc. while we may agree with Mr. Vyas that the said amount is on higher side, we think that the above amount allowed is not outside the brackets having regard to the fact that a substantial deduction of 40 per cent was made even though the deceased was merely walking on the side and was knocked down from behind. The global figure of compensation of Rs. 60,000/- to which the claims was reduced does not appear to be at all on the higher side, if at all the otherwise can be said, and therefore, while the apportionment under the head of loss of expectation of life, consortium, etc. may appear to be on the higher side, since the global figure is within brackets, we do not think that interference is called for in appeal.