Gujarat High Court
Amratben Gokalbhai Parmar vs Sajidbhai Sirajbhai Vahora on 25 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2857 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
AMRATBEN GOKALBHAI PARMAR & ORS.
Versus
SAJIDBHAI SIRAJBHAI VAHORA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS POOJA H HOTCHANDANI(7765) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MS. SUPRIYA TIWARI(17483) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR YOGI K GADHIA(5913) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 25/08/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Ms. Pooja H. Hotchandani, learned advocate on record for the appellants-original claimants. Learned advocate Mr. Yogi Gadhia has entered his appearance on behalf of respondent no.3- Insurance Company at the stage of condonation of delay.
2. With joint request of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal at the Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined admission stage. Looking at the limited issued raised in the present appeal, the appeal is heard finally in absence of respondent nos.1 and 2, who are the driver and owner of the insured vehicle and their interest being efficiently represented by the contesting respondent no.3-Insurance Company.
3. The present appeal is filed at the instance of the original claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, praying for enhancement of the award amount, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award dated 15.03.2024 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) & 5 th Additional District Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in M.A.C.P. No. 227 of 2021.
4. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants-original claimants has placed on record the proposed calculation, and has submitted that the Tribunal committed grave error in confining the income of the deceased to the tune of Rs. 7,000/- per month ignoring the minimum wages notified by the State Government in case of skilled worker at the relevant point of time. Learned advocate has invited my attention to the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal, as recorded in Para 14 of the impugned judgment and award, and has submitted that bare appreciation of the Notification, it is evident that the minimum wages prevailing at the relevant point of Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined time of the occurrence of accident in case of skilled worker, was Rs.9,087/-. She has, therefore, urged this Court to enhance the amount of compensation under the head of future prospective income.
4.1 Secondly, learned advocate has assailed the impugned judgment and award insofar as the amount of loss of filial consortium being awarded by the Tribunal. It is submitted that the claimants are the parents and two younger brothers of the deceased. She has further submitted that the father of the deceased was originally claimant no.1 in the claim proceedings. However, pending the hearing of the claim petition, he had unfortunately expired. She has further submitted that the Tribunal, though, had applied the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 as well as the decision in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram reported in AIRONLINE 2018 SC 1249, has confined the awarding of amount of compensation under the head of filial consortium to the tune of Rs.40,000/- only. She has also urged this Court to re-consider the amount of compensation awarded under other conventional heads including loss of estate and funeral expenses.
Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined 4.2 By making aforesaid submissions, learned advocate has urged this Court to allow the present appeal, and to enhance the amount of compensation, which may be awarded with interest and proportionate costs.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Yogi Gadhia appearing for respondent no.3-Insurance Company has mainly relied upon the findings and reasons assigned by the Claim Tribunal. However, learned advocate was unable to dispute the settled legal position in this regard, and has urged this Court to pass appropriate orders.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and considering their submissions, in light of the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal, the only limited issue, which falls for consideration of this Court is, as to whether the Tribunal committed any error in awarding the amount of compensation under the respective heads, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence brought on record?
7. Admittedly, the present appeal is preferred at the instance of the original claimants, confining their submissions to the quantum of compensation essentially on the ground of future prospective income, loss of consortium and conventional heads, as awarded by the Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined Tribunal. The respondent no.3-Insurance Company though having contested the present appeal, has not preferred any appeal, so far against the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. In such circumstances, the issue of the negligency of the driver of the insured vehicle, the involvement of the vehicle and the liability, as determined and fixed by the Tribunal, has attained finality. Other foundational factors for the purpose of determination of amount of compensation under different heads are concerned, viz-a-viz, the age of the deceased and the number of the claimants and the deduction and multiplier adopted by the Tribunal, have remained uncontroverted.
8. As regards the submissions made by learned advocate, the income of the deceased being determined on lower side is concerned, in absence of any proof of income being produced on record and considering the nature of vocation with which the deceased was associated, it is an undisputed fact that the deceased was earning his livelihood by doing Mistri work. In such circumstances, the Tribunal has rightly treated the deceased to be a skilled worker. In view of the settled legal position, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Govind Yadav vs The New India Insurance Co.Ltd reported in 2011 (10) SCC 683, in absence of proof of income, the Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined Tribunal ought to have considered the yardstick of minimum wages prevailing at the relevant point of time, as notified by the State Government. It is an undisputed fact that the deceased had succumbed to injuries due to the motor vehicle accident, which had occurred on 09.09.2020. On bare perusal of the Notification issued by the State Government, as rightly pointed out by learned advocate for the appellants-original claimants, the minimum wages prevailing on the date of occurrence of accident, in the case of skilled worker, was Rs.9,087/-.
9. Hence, in the opinion of this Court, the Tribunal committed grave error in confining the income of the deceased to the tune of Rs.7,000/- only. The object of beneficial piece of legislation is to extend just and proper amount of compensation to the victims of the motor vehicle accident. Keeping the aforesaid object in mind, this Court is inclined to accept the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellants-original claimants and the income is accordingly enhanced from Rs.7,000/- to Rs.9,087/- per month. The prospective future income of the deceased is considered by applying 40% rise, noticing the age of the deceased being 22 years at the time of occurrence of accident, the prospective income is accordingly considered as Rs.9,087 x 40% = Rs. Rs.3,635/- i.e. Rs. 9087/- + Rs.3635/- = Rs. 12,722/-. Since, the deceased was survived by both aged parents Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined and two younger brothers, the Tribunal has rightly applied the parameters indicated in the table reproduced in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr reported in (2009) 2 ACJ 1298, and has considered deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased who was unmarried as one half (½). Thus, the base income of the deceased, after deduction, is considered as Rs.6,361/-. The Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 18, considering the age of the deceased as 22 years at the time of accident and accordingly, the future loss of income of the deceased is re-determined as Rs.13,73,976/- (6361x12x18).
10. Having held so, the issue of consortium is also required to be re- considered, in light of settled the legal position laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General (supra. As pointed out by learned advocate for the appellants-original claimants, the original claim petition was preferred by both the parents, which includes the father of the deceased, who had unfortunately expired, pending the claim proceedings. May that be so, the fact remains that on the date of accident, the father of the claimant was entitled to the loss towards filial consortium. Hence, applying the aforesaid principles of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the facts of the case and considering 10% rise, this Court is of the view that filial consortium is required to Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined be reconsidered as Rs.96,800/- (Rs.48,400x 2) for both parents . So far as the enhancement sought for under the conventional heads are concerned, in view of the settled legal position laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), in the facts of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellants- original claimants shall be entitled to an amount of R.18,150/- each under the heads of loss of consortium and funeral expenses respectively. For the foregoing reasons, the revised calculation of the enhanced amount of compensation is reproduced in tabular form hereunder:
Under the Head of Compensation
of Rs.
Future loss of income 13,73,976/-
Loss of estate 18,150/-
Loss of Funeral Expenses 18,150/-
Loss of Filial Consortium 96,800/-
Total 15,07,076/-
Less awarded amount of 11,31,400/-
compensation by Tribunal
Enhanced amount 3,75,676/-
(Rs.15,07,076- 11,31,400)=
Interest @7.5%
11. For the foregoing reasons, the present First Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 15.03.2024 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) & 5 th Additional District Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in M.A.C.P. No. 227 of 2021, is hereby modified by enhancing the amount of Rs.3,75,676/- towards total compensation to the original claimants-appellants herein, with proportionate costs and interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its actual realization, to be realized jointly and severally from the original opponent nos.1 to 3- respondents herein.
12. Respondent No.3 in particular, being the Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with interest and costs with the concerned Tribunal within a period of Eight Weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On deposit of the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal shall proceed with release and disbursement of the entire award amount in favour of the present appellant no.1 to the extent of 70%, appellant no.2 to the extent of 15% and appellant no.3 to the extent of 15%, subject to due verification strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard. While making the payment, learned Tribunal/Court shall deduct the Court Fess, if not paid, in accordance with prevailing Rule. Let the aforesaid exercise be undertaken by the Tribunal within a period of two weeks from the date of deposit of the award amount.
Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2857/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2025 undefined
13. With these observations, present First Appeal stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:36:26 IST 2025