Gujarat High Court
Babubhai Bhailal Thakkar vs Babulal Durgaram Mali on 23 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2710 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
BABUBHAI BHAILAL THAKKAR
Versus
BABULAL DURGARAM MALI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 23/06/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. Vishal Mehta, learned advocate on record for the appellant and learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak appearing for the respondent no.2- Insurance Company. Pursuant to the instructions received, she has confirmed her appearance and she shall file her Vakalatnama before the Registry. Registry to accept her Vakalatnama.
2. Looking to the nature of the claim involved, the appeal is taken Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025 undefined up for hearing with the assistance of learned advocates for the respective parties.
3. The present appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, at the instance of the original claimant, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 03.03.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), District- Banaskantha at Deesa in M.A.C.P. No. 3089 of 2009. 3.1 By the said impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition, holding the respondents jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- with costs and simple interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its actual realization, as against the amount of compensation claimed to the tune of Rs.1 Lakh.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant, at the outset, has invited my attention to the order dated 09.09.2022 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, at the stage of admission of the appeal. While referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajkumar vs. Ajay Kumar reported in (2011) 1 SCC 343, learned advocate has submitted that at the stage of admission hearing, the issue of Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025 undefined assessment of disability was pressed for. However, at this stage, the present appeal is confined on the aspect of loss of future income, while considering 5% permanent disability, being agreed by the respective parties before the Tribunal. He has further pointed out that the claimant has been able to establish that his monthly income at the time of the accident, was Rs.8000/- per month. In this regard, the Tribunal has taken into consideration the income tax returns of three years, which is produced at Exh. 20. However, according to the learned advocate, the Tribunal committed gross error in arriving at a conclusion that no proof of age of the claimant, has been brought on record. In this regard, the learned advocate heavily relied upon the aforesaid income tax returns at Exh. 20, wherein it has clearly transpired that the date of birth of the claimant is 01.06.1962. Learned advocate has, therefore, submitted that the claimant was aged about 43 years at the time of the accident.
4.1 By referring to the aforesaid dates, learned advocate has submitted that the compensation towards future loss of income, thus, is required to be reconsidered as Rs.67,200/- by applying the multiplier of 14. Despite aforesaid material being brought on record, the Tribunal proceeded to award lump sum compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- only, whereby 50% of the award amount was directed Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025 undefined to be deducted towards contributory negligence of the claimant himself. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to allow the appeal and to enhance the amount of compensation with interest.
5. Learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak, appearing for respondent no. 2 - Insurance Company, has vehemently objected to the aforesaid submissions of learned advocate for the appellant. She has invited my attention to the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal. According to learned advocate, in absence of any proof of age being brought on record, no error can be found with the approach of the Tribunal, in awarding lump sum compensation. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to not entertain the present appeal.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned advocates for the respective parties, in light of the findings and reasons assigned by the learned Judge, the only issue which falls for consideration of this Court in the present appeal, is with regard to the amount of compensation towards future loss of income being determined by the Tribunal.
7. I have closely considered the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal, in light of the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant. Indisputably, there is no challenge to the aforesaid findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal at the instance of Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025 undefined respondent no. 2 - Insurance Company. Thus, the monthly income of the claimant assessed as Rs.8000/- per month at the time of the accident, has remained uncontroverted. As rightly pointed out by learned advocate for the appellant, the permanent disability of the claimant in reference to the body as a whole, has been agreed to be considered as 5%. However, in absence of direct evidence about age of claimant, Tribunal has refused to determine claim and has proceeded to award lump sum compensation. This brings me to the issue of proof of age, in order to determine the correct multiplier, to be applied in the facts of the case. The reliance is placed on income tax returns. The income tax returns of three years of the claimant which have been brought on record at Exh.20. While income tax returns are considered as reliable document for assessing income in motor accident claim cases, the question arises whether the same can be considered as proof of age. Generally, in cases where other documents like Birth Certificate, School Leaving Certificate and Government issued identification cards are available, the reference to IT records may not be substantive proof of age. However, in absence of aforesaid document on record, and in absence of any contradictions of date of birth being brought on record, the same being statutory document can always be considered as evidence for the purpose of determination of age of the claimant. In fact, from the findings and Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025 undefined reasons assigned by the Tribunal, it is evident that the aforesaid document has been appreciated and accepted as an evidence or proof of income of the claimant. The Tribunal, thus, having satisfied itself with regard to the evidentiary value to be attached to the aforesaid document, in the opinion of this Court, ought to have considered it as an evidence of the age of proof, more particularly, when the date of birth has been reflected in the aforesaid document.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal has committed serious error in arriving at a conclusion that no proof of age of the claimant, was brought on record.
9. Having held so, for the purpose of determination of future loss of income, considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr reported in (2009) 2 ACJ 1298, appropriate would be to apply the multiplier of 14, looking at the age of the claimant at the time of accident, which has been considered as 43 years. As regards future prospect is concerned, considering the age of the claimant as 43 years, as held 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, the 25% addition to his income assessed is to be considered. Hence, the future loss of income is determined as: Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025 undefined Rs.8,000 × 5% disability = Rs.400/- per month Rs. 400 × 12 months = Rs. 4,800/- per annum Rs.4800 x25% = Rs.1200/- per annum Rs.6000/- (Rs.4800 +Rs.1200)x 14 = Rs. 84,000/-
10. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal stands partly allowed. The total amount of compensation is modified from Rs.10,000/- to Rs. 84,000/-. In the present appeal, learned advocate for the claimant has not disputed the negligency of the claimant being determined as 50% towards accident. The impugned judgment and award dated 03.03.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), District- Banaskantha at Deesa in M.A.C.P. No. 3089 of 2009, is hereby modified. Respondents are held responsible to pay the enhanced amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.37,000/- (Rs.84,000-Rs. 10,000= Rs.74,000 x 50%) with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
11. The respondent- Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with proportionate cost and interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. On deposit of the aforesaid enhanced amount by the respondent-Insurance Company, the Tribunal is directed to release Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2710/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2025 undefined and disburse the aforesaid amount in favour of the original claimant, 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 shall deduct the Court Fess, if not paid, in accordance with prevailing Rules. Let the aforesaid exercise be undertaken by the Tribunal within a period of two weeks from the date of deposit of the award amount.
12. With these observations, present First Appeal stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
13. Record and proceedings received, if any, be sent back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 05 00:46:20 IST 2025