Gujarat State Road Transport Co. v. Laxman Singh — 1987 DIGILAW 915 (RAJ)

A.K. MATHUR, J.—This is an appeal against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dungarpur dated 12.4.1985 whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,47,800/- as compensation. Aggrieved against this, the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) has preferred this appeal. 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 26.10.1980 deceased Kurichand who was a Ward-Boy in Bichiwara Hospital while going back on his cycle to village Sisod on the national high-way Kherwara to Ratanpur met with an accident. It is alleged that the deceased was going back to his home and was driving the cycle on the left side. At that time a bus bearing No. GRT 7473 which was being driven by Laxman Singh came rashly and negligently of the Corporation with an excessive speed and struck against the cyclist deceased Kurichand, as a result of this accident deceased received injuries on his head and fell unconscious. He was immediately removed to the Dungarpur Hospital and thereafter to Udaipur for treatment. But on 30.10.1980 he succumbed to the injuries caused in the accident. Deceased was aged 30 years and he had minor children. He was earning Rs. 500/-per month and if he would have alive he would have earned Rs. 800/- per month. Thus, his average income would have come to Rs. 650/-. This claim petition was filed by the dependents of the deceased claiming a sum of Rs. 1, 58, 500/- as compensation against the driver of the bus and the Corporation. 3. The learned Tribunal after recording the necessary evidence came to the conclusion that the vehicle was driven rashly and negligently and assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 550/-. Out of that amount the dependency was found to be of Rs. 450/- and a multiplier of 27 years was employed. Thus, the dependency was calculated at Rs. 1,45,800/- and Rs. 1,500/- for taxi charges and medicines and Rs. 500/- for damages to the cycle. Thus, a sum of Rs. 1,47,800/-was awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also awarded interest @ 6% per annum and directed as to how the amount is to be distributed and deposited in the Scheduled Bank. Aggrieved against this the Corporation has filed the present appeal. 4. Mr. 500/- for damages to the cycle. Thus, a sum of Rs. 1,47,800/-was awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also awarded interest @ 6% per annum and directed as to how the amount is to be distributed and deposited in the Scheduled Bank. Aggrieved against this the Corporation has filed the present appeal. 4. Mr. Singhi, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as a matter of fact there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the Corporation. Learned counsel also submitted that the amount of compensation awarded to the claimants is excessive. 5. I have heard learned counsel and have gone through the judgment of the learned Tribunal. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the cyclist was going with the normal speed on his cycle and the bus which came from behind and struck against the cyclist. There was no negligence on the part of the cyclist and he was going to his village on his cycle with a normal speed. The eye-witness A. W. 3 Jeewa has deposed that the bus of the Corporation which was going from Udaipur to Ahmedabad was at excessive speed and the deceased Kurichand who was going on the road side was hit by this bus. The Tribunal has accepted the testimony of this witness. I find myself wholly in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal. Thus, it cannot be said that the deceased was in any way at fault. It appears that the vehicle of the appellant was driven with an excessive speed. Thus, the negligence of the driver is established. 6. Now, coming to the question of compensation, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation on a very reasonable basis. The deceased was in service as a Ward Boy and was drawing Rs. 500/- as salary and if he had been promoted he would have earned Rs. 800/- per month. But the Tribunal after considering over the matter found that the deceased was drawing Rs. 550/-. Out of that Rs. 100/-he would have spent on himself. If therefore, atleast he would have spent Rs. 450/- on his family. Since the deceased was 30 years of age at the time of the accident, therefore, the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of this case employed a multiplier of 27 years and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,45,800/-. Out of that Rs. 100/-he would have spent on himself. If therefore, atleast he would have spent Rs. 450/- on his family. Since the deceased was 30 years of age at the time of the accident, therefore, the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of this case employed a multiplier of 27 years and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,45,800/-. In the present case, the multiplier of 27 years for a Ward Boy of 30 years is not excessive. Therefore, the Tribunal has assessed the dependency at Rs. 1,45,800/-as compensation. The multiplier of 27 years in the present case is imminently just and cannot be said to be excessive. Likewise, awarding of a sum of Rs. 1500/-as taxi charges for transporting the deceased to Udaipur for treatment and Rs. 500/- for damages to the cycle are also justified. 7. Thus, in these circumstances, 1 do not find any merit in this case and the same is dismissed.