IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 1362 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- FOJAJI BABUJI VANJARA Versus KALEKHAN SHERKHAN PATHAN -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR GT DAYANI for Petitioners NOTICE SERVED for Respondent No. 1 MR YN RAVANI for Respondent No. 2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR Date of decision: 07/07/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. The present revision application is directed against the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Himatnagar in M.A.C.P.No.171 of 1995. The present applicants are the heirs of deceased Saniben Babuji Vanjara, who died on 1.2.1995 because of a road accident. The aforesaid claim petition was filed on behalf of the present applicants before the Tribunal. It seems that, initially interim application was made before the Tribunal for Rs.1,49,500/-. Subsequently, the same was reduced to Rs.89,500/-. The Tribunal, by its order below Exhibit 3, in M.A.C.P.No.171 of 1995, passed an order under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and partly allowed the said application, and an amount of Rs.59,500/- was awarded with interest at the rate of 15% per annum, with necessary direction about apportionment and order of investment. 2. Thereafter, it seems that an application for modification of the said order was given on behalf of the Insurance Company and that order was ultimately modified, by which amount of Rs.54,500/- was awarded, with interest at the rate of 15% per annum. The original applicants have challenged both the aforesaid orders in this revision application. 3. I have gone through the judgment of the Tribunal. While deciding application under Section 163-A, the Tribunal has given detailed reasons for awarding the aforesaid amount of Rs.54,500/-. The yearly income of the deceased was considered by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/-. The age of the deceased was 60 years at the time of death and, therefore, multiplier of 5 was granted. Annual loss of dependency income was arrived at Rs.10,000/- and after applying the multiplier of 5, Rs.50,000/- was granted under the aforesaid head. The Tribunal also considered the question about general damages as provided under Item 3 of the Second Schedule to the Act and awarded Rs.2,000/- by way of funeral expenses. I do not find any error of law or jurisdiction as the present revision application is under Section 115 of C.P.C. In that view of the matter, the interim order granted by the Tribunal is not required to be interfered with and this revision application is required to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. 4. If the main application, i.e. M.A.C.P. No.171 of 1995, is not disposed of by this time, it is directed that the said application pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Himatnagar, may be disposed of by 31st October, 2000. 5. Writ of this order may be sent to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Himatnagar forthwith. 6. Subject to the aforesaid direction, the revision is dismissed. 7th July, 2000 ( P.B. Majmudar, J. ) **** (apj)