Case Note & Summary
The Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (GSRTC) appealed against the judgment and award dated 04.02.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchmahal at Godhra in MACP No.452 of 2019, whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation to the legal heirs of Parsingbhai Rumalbhai Baria, who died in a road accident on 18.10.2019. The deceased, aged 45 years, was walking on the left side of the road when a GSRTC bus driven rashly and negligently hit him, causing fatal injuries. An FIR was registered at Morva (H) Police Station. The claimants sought Rs.15,00,000 compensation. The Tribunal assessed the deceased's income at Rs.6,000 per month, applied multiplier 14, and awarded compensation. GSRTC argued that the Tribunal erred in holding the driver solely negligent based solely on the FIR without examining any eyewitness, and that the compensation was exorbitant. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the FIR is a contemporaneous document and the driver did not examine himself to rebut the presumption of negligence. The income assessment was reasonable given the deceased's occupation as a labourer, and the multiplier of 14 was correct as per Sarla Verma. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Negligence - Proof of Negligence - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166 - The Tribunal held the bus driver solely negligent based on FIR and other evidence, despite no eyewitness being examined. The High Court upheld this finding, noting that the FIR is a contemporaneous document and the driver did not examine himself to rebut the presumption. (Paras 3-6) B) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Income Assessment - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 168 - The Tribunal assessed the deceased's income at Rs.6,000 per month as a labourer at a tea stall, in absence of documentary evidence. The High Court upheld this as reasonable, considering the notional income and the fact that the claimants were not required to prove exact income. (Paras 3, 7) C) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Multiplier - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 168 - The Tribunal applied multiplier of 14 for deceased aged 45 years. The High Court upheld this as per the settled principle in Sarla Verma v. DTC. (Para 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal erred in holding the bus driver solely negligent based on FIR without examining eyewitness, and whether the compensation awarded was exorbitant.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's judgment and award. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Negligence can be established through FIR and other evidence even without eyewitness
- Income assessment in absence of documentary evidence can be based on notional income
- Multiplier for age 45 is 14 as per Sarla Verma
