It further held that the Tribunal had erred in companysidering the age of the deceased at the time of his death rather than the age of the parents for determination of multiplier, since they are the claimants in the case on hand, as per the guidelines laid down in Sarla Verma Ors.
Thereupon he was taken to L.G. Hospital wherein he succumbed to his injuries.
But uncertainties of life cannot be ignored taking relevant factors into companysideration.
Due to the force created by this accident, Rajs two wheeler slid for about 25 feet while Raj fell down and sustained grievous injuries.
The necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case with a view to determine whether the appellant, Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi, the father of Raj deceased is entitled for relief as prayed in this appeal.
v. Delhi Transport Corporation Anr.1.
Had he decided to join government service and got selected, he would have been put in the pay scale for Assistant Engineer and would have at least earned Rs.
1/3rd of the monthly income was deducted towards personal expenses.
1064 of 2005 with First Appeal No.1555 of 2005 by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, wherein the High Court dismissed First Appeal No.1064 of 2005 which was filed by the claimant and allowed First Appeal No.1555 of 2005 which was filed by the Insurance Company.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the appellant preferred First Appeal No.1064 of 2005 before the High Court for enhancement of companypensation, whereas the 2nd respondent Insurance Company preferred First Appeal No.1555 of 2005 for the reduction of the companypensation awarded by the Tribunal.
Therefore, by applying the appropriate multiplier of 13, the High Court determined the loss of dependency at Rs.14,04,000/ as against Rs.23,04,000/ as companysidered by the Tribunal.
While on his way, near Bhadvatnagar bus stand, a truck bearing registration number GQA 7215 belonging to the respondent, Ramkaran Ramchandra Sharma crashed into the two wheeler on which Raj was riding.
On 12.07.2002, Raj Ashvinbhai, the deceased was heading to Istanpur from Uttamnagar on his two wheeler.
The Tribunal ascertained the future income of the deceased at Rs.18,000/ per month.
Therefore, Rs.12,000/ per month Rs.1,44,000/ p.a.
was calculated for the loss of dependency to the parents of the deceased.
A sum of Rs.15,000/ was awarded towards love and affection and Rs.5,000/ towards funeral expenses and thus a total companypensation of Rs.23,24,000/ was arrived at by the Tribunal.
The claimant appellant filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in short the Tribunal at Ahmedabad, claiming Rs.28,73,000/ as companypensation.
Since the age of the deceased at the time of his death was 19 years, on applying the appropriate multiplier of 16, the total companypensation towards loss of dependency was arrived at Rs.23,04,000/ .
The Tribunal apportioned companytributory negligence at 20 on the part of the deceased and 80 on the driver of the offending truck and thus, after making 20 deduction towards companytributory negligence on the part of the deceased the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.18,59,200/ with interest at the rate of 9 per annum to the appellant.
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has filed these appeals.
After examining the facts, evidence produced on record and circumstances of the case, the High Court was of the view that the companytributory negligence on the part of the deceased was higher than 20, however, it affirmed the companytributory negligence as determined by the Tribunal.
On the same day, a panchnama was filed before the Vatva Police Station, Ahmedabad.
Therefore, after 20 deduction towards companytributory negligence and addition towards other heads, the High Court, by its impugned Judgment and order awarded a companypensation under all heads of Rs.11,39,200/ with 9 interest per annum.
GOPALA GOWDA, J. These appeals have been filed by the appellant against the impugned companymon Judgment and order dated 18.6.2013 passed in First Appeal No.
