FA/5374/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 5374 of 2007 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15187 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Sd/- ========================================================= 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 ? 1 to 5 NO ========================================================= NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. - Appellant(s) Versus DOLIBEN RAMESHBHAI R KHANT & 3 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR VASANT S SHAH for Appellant(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Date : 26/02/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Appellant-insurance company has, under the provisions of section 173 of the Motor FA/5374/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT Vehicles Act, 1988, sought to challenge the judgment and award dated 31.5.2007 of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Modasa in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.1176 of 2000, whereunder, mother and widow of the deceased are awarded Rs.2,99,000/- with cost and interest by way of compensation. There is no dispute about the fact that the deceased victim of the accident was, on 31.5.2000, crushed under the wheels of a tractor insured by the appellant and a complaint for the offences punishable under sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 177 and 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act was registered against the driver in Dhansura Police Station. 2. The appeal was sought to be pressed only on the grounds that the statement of complainant was at variance with the facts and that no eye witness was examined in evidence. It was also vehemently submitted by learned counsel Mr.V.S.Shah that income of the deceased was presumed by the Tribunal without any basis. 3. It was seen from record that the Tribunal had relied upon panchnama at Exh.24 which clearly indicated not only blood on the wheels of the tractor but flesh and blood on the wheels as well FA/5374/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT as the engine of the tractor. Even as the appellant was permitted to take all defences, it had completely failed to adduce any evidence in respect of accident or income of the deceased. In such circumstances, the Tribunal had believed the income of the deceased to be Rs.1,400/- per month against the claim of monthly income of Rs.5,000/- and, considering the prospective income of Rs.2,100/- per month and age of 35 years at the time of death, multiplier of 16 was applied to the figure of monthly dependency benefit to arrive at the total figure of Rs.2,68,800/-. There was no dispute about the fact that the deceased was aged 35 years and also held, alongwith others, a parcel of land. Therefore, in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, assessment of compensation could, by no stretch, be said to be on higher side. 4. No ground having been even, prima facie, made out for entertaining the appeal and interfering with the impugned award, the appeal is summarily dismissed. 5. The amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited with this Court for the purpose of appeal shall be transmitted to the Tribunal as part payment towards liability of the appellant to deposit the FA/5374/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT full amount with the Tribunal. Civil Application for stay does not survive and stands disposed as rejected. Sd/- ( D.H.Waghela, J.) (KMG Thilake)