FA/380/1990 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 380 of 1990 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION - Appellant(s) Versus KANKUBEN WIDOW OF DECEASED KUBERBHAI PARMAR & 8 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR HARDIK C RAWAL for Appellant(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 1 - 2. NOTICE UNSERVED for Defendant(s) : 3 - 7, 9, MR HJ BHATT for Defendant(s) : 8, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 14/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 26.07.89 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxilliary), Baroda, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.309 of 1985 whereby the Tribunal directed the original opponent nos. 2, 3 and 4 to jointly and/or severally pay a compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum and cost of Rs. 5077/-. 2.0 The short facts of the case are as under: 2.1 The original applicants-present respondent nos. FA/380/1990 2/3 JUDGMENT 1 to 5 had filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- for the accidental death of the husband of the original applicant no.1- present respondent no.1 when the truck of the original respondent no.2 and the bus of present appellant met with an accident thereby injuring the husband of the present respondent no.1. The husband of the present respondent no.1 succumbed to his injuries. The relatives of the deceased filed claim petition seeking compensation wherein the Tribunal passed the aforesaid award. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in calculating the income of the deceased. He further submitted that the Tribunal has erred in deducting Rs. 100/- for personal expenses and coming to the conclusion that the monthly dependency would be Rs. 1300/-. He has further contended that the Tribunal also erred in applying multiplier of 20 in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 4. As a result of hearing and perusal of the record certain aspects are not disputed. There is sufficient evidence on record to show that the accident in question has taken place due to the negligence of the driver of the truck as well as the driver of the bus. Learned Advocate for the appellant is not able to point out anything to the contrary in this aspect. The Tribunal has gone through the records in detail and has come to the conclusion that the original FA/380/1990 3/3 JUDGMENT respondents are liable to pay the amount of compensation. 4.1 From the perusal of the records, it appears that the Tribunal is justified in coming to the conclusion that the deceased must be earning Rs. 500/- per month from the work of looking after the properties and collecting rent on behalf of the landlord. The Tribunal is fully justified in considering the monthly dependency at Rs. 1300/- and applying multiplier of 20 as well. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs. 1,75,000/- by way of compensation to the original claimants and no interference therefore is called for in the present appeal and the same is required to be dismissed. 5. No other contentions are raised. 6. In the premises aforesaid, appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. [K.S. JHAVERI, J.] Divya//