FA/1440/1992 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1440 of 1992 With FIRST APPEAL No. 1442 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. - Appellant(s) Versus BHANUSHANKER NARBHERAM JOSHI F/O.DECD.NATHURAM@ ARVINDKUMAR & 3 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS LILU K BHAYA for Appellant(s) : 1, MS HANSA B PUNANI for Defendant(s) : 1 - 2. MR SL SUCHDAY for Defendant(s) : 1 - 2. RULE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 3, None for Defendant(s) : 4, SERVED BY AFFIX.-(R) for Defendant(s) : 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.4,4.2.5 ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Date : 30/01/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Both the appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, “the Act”) FA/1440/1992 2/3 JUDGMENT were argued together on account of the common issue of death of two very young children having been involved; even as the appeals have arisen from different awards. The appeals were pressed for reducing the amount of compensation mainly on the grounds that the deceased children aged 7 and 4 years, could not have been presumed to earn substantial amount in the future particularly with the background of poor and illiterate family and the application of multiplier of 20 in case of deceased son aged 7 and application of multiplier of 14 in case of deceased daughter aged 4 was on the higher side. It was seen from the record that, in the award impugned in First Appeal No.1440 of 1992, the total sum awarded by way of compensation was Rs. 76,500/- on the basis of presumption of Rs.200/- per month of dependency benefit and in the second case, the dependency benefit was counted at Rs.3600/- per year to award a total sum of Rs.67,900/-. 2. There is no substance in the argument of the appellant that the dependency benefits could not have been assessed at as poor a rate as above or that the application of the multiplier was on the higher side in the facts and circumstances of the case. Although it was vehemently argued that the multiplier ought to be suitably modified in view of the age of the parents of the deceased FA/1440/1992 3/3 JUDGMENT children, it could be seen that in the lower strata of society to which the claimants belonged, age for earning would naturally start earlier and even the contribution of a female child into the household or other activity of the family could be more significant than in the family of affluent people. There was also no reason to reduce the interest awarded at the rate of 12% on the amount of compensation in view of the prevailing rate of interest on Fixed Deposits at the relevant time and the depreciation in value of money over years in view of recognised figures of inflation. Thus, no ground having been made out for effecting any reduction in the amount of compensation awarded by the impugned award, the appeals are dismissed. (D.H.WAGHELA, J.) Hitesh