Gujarat High Court
Sumanbai Ramchandra Vani vs Dilipsinh Bhagvansinh Yadav on 17 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3818/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3818 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
NO
==========================================================
SUMANBAI RAMCHANDRA VANI & ANR.
Versus
DILIPSINH BHAGVANSINH YADAV & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
ORTIS LAW OFFICES(12342) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
HARSH A VYAS(9330) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
KRUTARTH K DESAI(9662) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 17/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 20.12.2024 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Bharuch (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.21 of 2014, the appellants - original claimants preferred present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short).
2) Considering the facts of the case and as the issue is in narrow compass, present appeal is taken up for its final disposal forthwith.
3) Heard Mr. Hemal. Shah, learned Advocate for the appellants -
original Claimants, Mr. Harsh Vyas, learned counsel for Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Mon Nov 17 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 00:59:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3818/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/11/2025 undefined respondent No.1 and Mr. Krutarth Desai, learned Advocate for respondent - Insurance Company.
4) It is the case of the appellants that on 30.12.2013, when the deceased Laxmibai Digambar Vani was standing on the road of Hansol - Vadoli near Aniyadra village, at that time, respondent No.1 - driver of car bearing registration No.GJ-16-AP-5304 came in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the deceased, due to which, the deceased received serious injuries and succumbed to it. Therefore, the appellants filed Claim Petition seeking compensation. After appreciating the evidence produced on record, the learned Tribunal was pleased to partly allowed the claim petition.
5) The appeal is filed on limited ground that the learned Tribunal has not considered minimum wages of prevalent time and also not properly considered loss of estate due to which loss is suffered by the appellants.
6) Learned Advocate for the Insurance Company has submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just, legal and proper and no interference is called for.
7) As challenge is given only qua income and loss of estate, hence the appeal is required to be decided in narrow compass. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Govind Yadav Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2012(1) TAC 1 (SC), that if no proof of income is produced on the record then Tribunal has to consider prevalent minimum wages in absence of ample evidence of monthly income of the deceased. In the present case the accident occurred on 30.12.2013 and during that time, the deceased was working as labourer and as per the Government approved minimum wages Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Mon Nov 17 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 00:59:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3818/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/11/2025 undefined the rate was Rs.5,580/-, whereas, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/- per month which is required to be enhanced and hence, the income of the deceased is reassessed as Rs.5,580/- per month. Further, the learned Tribunal has considered future prospective income as 40% and as the deceased was married 1/3 deduction as personal expenditure and living of the deceased and multiplier of 18 were considered by the learned Tribunal as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. [2009 (6) SCC 121] which are just and proper.
8) Therefore, calculating the income of the deceased as Rs.5,580/-
and future prospect of 40% = Rs.2,232/- which comes to Rs.7,812/- and 1/3 amount is required to be deducted as personal expenditure and living of the deceased which comes to Rs.2,604/- and the net amount comes to Rs.5,208/-. In view of above the amount under the head of future economy loss is required to be reassessed as Rs.5,208/- x 12 x 18 = Rs.11,24,928/-. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to get additional amount of Rs.3,18,528/- under the head of future economic loss.
Further, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expense, also awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium, however, this Court is of the view that the appellants are entitled to get Rs.18,150/- towards funeral expense and Rs.18,150/- towards loss of estate. Whereas, the deceased was daughter in law of the appellants hence the appellants are not entitled for any amount under the head of loss of consortium. Therefore, the appellants Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Mon Nov 17 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 00:59:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3818/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/11/2025 undefined are entitled to get additional amount of Rs.6,300/- (Rs.3,150/- under the head of funeral expense and Rs.3,150/- under the head of loss of estate).
9) As the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.8,36,400/-, however, as discussed above, the appellants would be entitled to get additional amount of Rs.3,24,828/- i.e. Rs.3,18,528/- under the head of future economic loss and Rs.6,300/- under the head of loss of estate and funeral expense with proportionate costs and interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal.
10) Hence, present appeal is partly allowed. The judgment and award dated 20.12.2024 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Bharuch, stands modified to the aforesaid extent. Rest of the judgment and award remains unaltered. Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall deposit the said additional amount of Rs.3,24,828/- along with interest as awarded by the Tribunal, before the Tribunal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Record and proceedings be remitted back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
11) The learned Tribunal is directed to recover or deduct the deficit court fees on enhanced amount and thereafter disburse the amount accordingly.
12) Award to be drawn accordingly.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
SUCHIT
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Mon Nov 17 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 00:59:20 IST 2025