FA/1163/1987 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1163 of 1987 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? -Yes. 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? -No. 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? -No. 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 ? -No. 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? -No. ========================================================= ROMHARSH AMBALAL JOSHI - Appellant(s) Versus DRIVER OF AUTORIXA NO GRR 129 & 2 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR JB DASTOOR for Appellant(s) : 1,MR AI SURTI for Appellant(s) : 1,MS BK VAKHARIA for Appellant(s) : 1, None for Defendant(s) : 1 - 2. MR ARUN H MEHTA for Defendant(s) : 3, MR SHASHIKANT S GADE for Defendant(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 15/05/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-original applicant has FA/1163/1987 2/5 JUDGMENT challenged the judgment and order dated 28/1/1987 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) at Ahmedabad City in the Motor Accident Claim Application No.67 of 1984 whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has partly allowed the application and awarded the amount of compensation of Rs.15,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the application till the date of realization with proportionate costs. 2. The facts in brief leading rise to filing of the appeal is as under: 2.1) The claim petition has been filed for recovery of compensation in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- for the injuries suffered and sustained by him in a vehicular accident on 25/2/1984 by the alleged rash and negligent driving of the auto rickshaw bearing registration no.GRR-129 belonging to 2nd opponent by the unnamed 1st opponent. On 25/2/1984 at about 10:30 at night petitioner was driving his scooter bearing registration no.GTB 6373 along with his friend Pravinchandra Jayantilla Shah as a pillion rider near Roopali Theater towards Nehru Bridge on the left side cautiously and carefully. By the time his scooter reached the middle of Nehru Bridge crossing at that time the unnamed 1st opponent came driving the auto rickshaw no.GRR 129 rashly and negligently from Roopali Theater side and dashed against the petitioner's scooter with the FA/1163/1987 3/5 JUDGMENT result that the scooter lost balance due to collision by auto rickshaw on its rear side and in the process his scooter was dragged to a distance and petitioner suffered injuries on his left leg. 2.2) On completion of the pleadings, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs.15,000/- as stated above. Hence, this appeal. 3. Mr.Dastoor, the learned counsel for the appellant has contended that income of the applicant is Rs.30,000/- per year but because of injuries he has suffered loss of income and because of disability, he will have to suffer loss of income in future also and beyond that nothing is awarded to the applicant under the head of future loss of income. He has further contended that the award is also required to be enhanced under the heads of pain, shock and suffering and under other grounds. He submitted that under the medical expenditure, the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation. 4. No one appears for the owner of the auto rickshaw. For the insurance company, learned advocate Mr.Gade appears and he has submitted that the insurance company is liable to pay only Rs.50,000/-. On the point of future loss of income, he has submitted that there is no loss and therefore, the appeal is FA/1163/1987 4/5 JUDGMENT required to be dismissed. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has accepted Rs.2,500/- as income per month. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and others vs. Trilok Chandra and others, reported in 1996 (3) GLR 136, the average monthly income of the appellant ought to have been assessed at Rs.3,750/- - ([Rs.5,000/- + Rs.2,500/- = Rs.7,500/-]. [Rs.7,500/2 = Rs.3,750/-]). Now, since the appellant has suffered 10% disability, the monthly loss of income would come to Rs.375/-, i.e. Rs. 4,500/- per year. After applying the multiplier of 12, the loss of future income comes to Rs.54,000/-. Since, the Tribunal has already awarded the amount of Rs.15,000/- under the said head, the appellant will be entitled for an additional amount of Rs.39,000/- (Rs.54,000/- minus Rs.15,000/- =Rs.39,000/-) along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. No other contention has been raised by the learned advocates for the parties. 6. On the facts of the case, the disability is to be considered in terms of future loss of income which is at 10%. Looking to the age of the applicant i.e. 30 years, the multiplier of 12 is just and proper and in view of decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State Road Transport Corporation (supra), future income FA/1163/1987 5/5 JUDGMENT is required to be revised as contended by the learned counsel for the claimants. 7. In the result, the applicant will be entitled to get Rs.39,000/- + Rs.15,000/- = Rs.54,000/- as compensation along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum. Rs.50,000/- will be paid by the Insurance Company and Rs.4,000/- will be recovered from the owner of the auto rickshaw along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of application i.e. 27/8/1984. The award is modified accordingly. 8. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. (K.S.Jhaveri, J.) (ila)