Gujarat High Court
Heirs Of Decd Trikamji Raghvaji vs Gujarat State Road Transport ... on 13 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3067 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
HEIRS OF DECD TRIKAMJI RAGHVAJI & ORS.
Versus
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS AMRITA AJMERA(5204) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4
MS HINA DESAI(1023) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 13/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 01.07.2013 passed by the learned Tribunal (Auxi.) Dhrangadhra in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.62 of 2005, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,42,600/- as a compensation along with the simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
2. The succinct facts leading to file the present appeal is that on 02.04.2005 at about 07.20 a.m. when Trikamji Raghvaji was riding his motorcycle on the correct side of the road, near Shishumandir school on Halvad-Sara road, in the meantime, the Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined respondent No.2 herein came by driving ST bus bearing registration No.GJ-18-V-5618 in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the motorcycle of the deceased. In the said accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and subsequently he succumbed to the injuries.
3. Upon being served with the notices of the claim petition, the respondent No.1 filed the written statement at Exh-29 and thereby denying the contents of the claim petition and prayed for dismissal.
4. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal has framed the issues which are as under:-
"1. Whether the deceased died owing to the injuries sustained in the vehicular accident owing to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident?
2. Whether the applicants are entitled for compensation?
3. What order?"
5. Having considered the material evidences on record, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,42,600/- as a compensation along with the simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization.
6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined judgment and award, the original claimants/appellant herein preferred the present appeal thereby challenging the impugned judgment and award on the ground of negligence as well as quantum.
7. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
8. Learned advocate Ms. Amrita Ajmera appearing on behalf of the original claimants/appellant vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal has held the rider of the motorcycle contributorily negligent to the extent of 25%. She further submitted that the FIR was lodged by the driver of the ST bus involved in the accident. On the basis of FIR, after conducting the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed by the prosecution agency against the driver of the offending bus/respondent No.2 herein. She further submitted that not only this, the police has recorded the statement of the conductor of the bus who stated that the accident has been caused owing to the sole negligence of respondent No.2 herein/driver of the offending bus. She further submitted that the learned Tribunal has ignored all the materials on record and committed a serious illegality in holding that the rider of the motorcycle was negligent to the extent of 25%. She further submitted that in the light of the evidences on record, Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined the rider of the motorcycle cannot be held liable, therefore, the findings returned by the learned Tribunal on the issue of negligence is deserved to be reversed.
9. Learned advocate for the appellant further submitted that the learned Tribunal has determined the notional income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/-. The said income is not challenged, but at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 43 years, therefore, learned Tribunal ought to have added 40% in place of 30% to the monthly income on account of future prospects, therefore the monthly notional income be further enhanced by 40% on account of future prospects of the deceased.
10. Learned advocate for the appellant further submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded the meager amount under the conventional heads. Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- as a loss of consortium though the deceased was survived by four legal representatives i.e. his wife, his two sons and mother. She further submitted that the learned Tribunal ought to have awarded a loss of consortium to all four legal representatives but the learned Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of consortium. She further submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded a Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined meager sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head of loss of estate and the meager amount of Rs.5,000/- under the head of funeral expenses. She further submitted that the compensation awarded under the head of loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses is deserved to be enhanced to Rs.1,93,600/-, 18,150/- and 18,150/- respectively under these heads.
11. On the other hand, learned advocate Ms. Hina Desai appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 GSRTC vehemently submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and award. She further submitted that the learned Tribunal has rightly appreciated the evidences on record. She further submitted that the accident has occurred owing to the sole negligence of the rider of the motorcycle. Learned advocate for the respondent No.1 also placed reliance on the panchnama of place of accident. Relying upon the panchnama, she further submitted that after accident the bus was found on the correct side of the road, therefore, it was the rider of the motorcycle who came from the wrong side. She further submitted that not only this, the driver of the bus himself appeared before the learned Tribunal in the witness box and proved his version. He was also cross-examined but the claimants could not elicit anything in Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined their favour, therefore, there is no infirmity in the findings returned by the learned Tribunal under issue No.1.
12. So far as the compensation under the conventional heads is concerned, learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the same may be awarded as per the settled legal positions of law.
13. Having considered the submissions of the learned advocates for the parties and having gone through the record, it is to be noted that Gauriben @ Gitaben Trikamji filed the affidavit examination-in-chief at Exh-9. In her affidavit she stated that the accident has occurred owing to the sole negligence of the driver of the ST bus bearing registration No.GJ- 18-V-5618, but in the cross-examination she admitted that she is not the eye-witness of the accident, therefore, on the point of negligence, her oral testimony is of no use. The driver of the ST bus/respondent No.2 herein also stepped into witness box and in his affidavit of examination-in-chief at Exh-30, he stated that the accident has occurred owing to the sole negligence of the rider of the motorcycle. He was cross-examined by the learned advocate for the appellant and he was suggested that the accident has occurred owing to his sole negligence but he Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined denied his suggestion. Learned advocate for the appellant placed reliance on the statement of the conductor of the bus. In his statement made to the investigating officer he stated that the accident has occurred owing to the sole negligence of the driver of the bus, but the said witness was not examined by the claimants before the learned Tribunal. Further, perusal of the panchnama, it transpires that after the accident bus was lying on the left hand side of the road, thus, having considered the materials on record, in my considered view the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in holding that the rider of the motorcycle was also contributorily negligent for causing the accident to the extent of 25%. Therefore, the findings returned by the learned Tribunal under issue No.1 deserves no interference and the same is upheld.
14. So far the income is concerned, learned Tribunal determined the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month from agriculture, was further enhanced by 30% on account of future prospects of the deceased. In my considered view, learned Tribunal has committed error in increasing the monthly income by 30% in place of 25% on account of future prospects, in view of the judgment of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Shethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 therefore the Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined income would come to Rs.3,750/- (Rs.3000 + 3000 x 25%). Therefore, annual income would come to Rs.45,000/- (3750 x
12). At the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 43 years, therefore, the multiplier of 14 is required to be applied which was rightly applied by the learned Tribunal. After applying the multiplier of 14, the total future loss of income would come to Rs.6,30,000/- (45000 x 14). It is on record that the deceased left behind by four legal representatives. Therefore, ¼ of the amount is required to be deducted on account of personal expenses of the deceased. After deducting the ¼ of the said amount, the net future loss of income comes to Rs.4,72,500/- i.e. (Rs.6,30,000/- Less Rs.1,57,500/-). The learned Tribunal has awarded meager amount of compensation under the conventional heads. Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head of loss of estate. It is on record that the deceased was left behind four legal representatives i.e. his wife, his two sons and mother. In view of the judgment of Pranay Shethi (supra) and Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram reported in 2018 (18) SCC 130, all the legal representatives are entitled for the loss of consortium. The loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses are also to be enhanced by 10% for a block of Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined each three completed years. Therefore, a sum of Rs.1,93,600/- (48,400 x 4) awarded under the head of loss of consortium. Similarly, a sum of Rs.18,150/- is awarded under the head of loss of estate and further a sum of Rs.18,150/- is awarded under the head of funeral expenses. Therefore the claimants/appellants shall be entitled for the following compensation.
15. In view of the above discussions, the following compensation is awarded under the following heads.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future Loss of Income 4,72,500/-
Loss of Consortium 1,93,600/-
Loss of Estate 18,150/-
Funeral Expenses 18,150/-
Total 7,02,400/-
Negligence attributed to the appellants (25%) 1,75,600/-
(25% of
Rs.7,02,400/-)
Total amount after deducting negligence 5,26,800/-
Less: compensation already awarded 3,42,600/-
Enhancement 1,84,200/-
16. It is to be noted that the deceased held contributorily negligent for causing the accident to the extent of 25%, hence 25% of the compensation is to be deducted on acccount of the Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3067/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined contributory negligence. Thus, the appellants shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.5,26,800/- (Rs.7,02,400/- less 25% of Rs.7,02,400/-). The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.3,42,600/-, therefore, the appellants shall be entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,84,200/- (Rs.5,26,800/- less Rs.3,42,600/-).
17. Learned Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, therefore, the appellant shall also be entitled for the interest at the rate of 7.5% on the said additional amount of compensation.
18. In view of the above discussions, the present appeal stands allowed partly to the above extent.
19. Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the additional amount of compensation along with the interest within a period of 8 weeks from today. Upon depositing of the said amount, the learned Tribunal shall disburse the amount to the original claimants after due verification.
20. R & P be sent back to the concerned learned Tribunal forthwith. No order as to costs.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) CDP Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Nov 15 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 17 22:21:46 IST 2025