Gujarat High Court
Reliance General Insurance Company ... vs Akshar Education Foundation on 21 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4165 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4165 of 2025
==========================================================
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
Versus
AKSHAR EDUCATION FOUNDATION & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS MASUMI V NANAVATY(9321) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 21/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellant-original opponent No.2 - Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. against the judgment and award dated 11.03.2025 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special), Rajkot (for short referred to as "learned Tribunal") in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.58 of 2010 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short referred to as "MV Act") wherein the learned Tribunal has allowed the claim petition of respondent No.2 - original claimant and awarded compensation of Rs.49,80,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition.
[2.0] Heard learned advocate for the appellant.
[3.0] The brief facts of the present claim petition are that the accident took place on 11.10.2019, when the minor claimant was hit by the Bus No.GJ-37-T-3748 which was driven by its driver with full speed Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined and in rash and negligent manner pursuant to which one leg of the minor claimant was amputated and another leg became disabled. Hence, the minor claimant preferred claim petition through her father and the learned Tribunal was pleased to award compensation of Rs.49,80,000/- to the original claimant. Hence, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and award, present appeal is filed by the appellant - insurance company of the offending vehicle challenging the quantum of compensation.
[4.0] Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed an error in awarding 18 multiplier to the minor claimant who at the time of accident was aged only 4 years and the learned Tribunal has also committed an error in awarding interest on the amount of future prospects and committed an error in awarding Rs.10 lakh under the head of pain, shock and suffering and loss of amenities of life and also erred in awarding compensation of Rs.3 lakh under the head of future medical expenses. She has submitted that minor claimant is not entitled to receive any interest on future prospects or under different heads. Hence, she has requested to allow the present appeal.
[5.0] Having heard learned advocate appearing for the appellant and going through the reasons assigned by the learned Tribunal in the impugned judgment and award, it appears that the minor claimant had sustained serious injuries due to accident caused by Bus No.GJ-37-T- 3748, which was driven in rash and negligent manner and due to this reason, her one leg was amputated and second leg was permanently disabled. Herein, the factum of accident is not in dispute and present appeal is filed only on the ground of quantum of compensation.
Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined
[5.1] Perusing the record and impugned judgment and award, it appears that at the time of accident, minor was aged only 4 years. Her left leg was amputated. Considering the aforesaid fact, the learned Tribunal has considered the multiplier of 18 relying on Schedule II provided under Section 163 of the MV Act. Learned advocate for the appellant has raised grievance against the multiplier considered by the learned Tribunal and stated that multiplier of 15 ought to have been considered. The injury certificate produced before the learned Tribunal at Exh.55 shows following deformities sustained by the minor claimant.
"1. Compound Grade 3c tibia / fibula left side with subtalar subluxation
2. Right side crush injury of leg and ankle. It was extending upto mid thigh Presently she is having following
1. Above knee amputation at lower thigh level left side
2. Right knee range of movement is 70 to 110 degree
3. Multiple scar over right knee and leg
4. Unable to keep right leg straight
5. She is unable to even stand on her right leg since due to restricted range of movement."
Perusing the disablement of minor claimant, if we consider the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal under the head of loss of marriage prospects and other heads, it appears that the learned Tribunal has not considered the argument on behalf of the insurance company to apply multiplier of 15 more particularly considering the nature of injury and age of the victim, as she is minor and has Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined sustained the permanent disability and other consequential losses of said injury, claimant is entitled for getting the compensation in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kajal vs. Jagdish Chand and Others reported in (2020) 4 SCC 413 wherein it has been held that the Tribunal shall award the compensation very conservatively keeping in mind the degree of deprivation and the loss caused by such deprivation which can be termed as "just compensation" as insured / injured claimant has to face the consequences throughout her life and that should not be any token damages. Even, in the case of Master Ayush vs. Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited and Anr. reported in (2022) 7 SCC 738, relying on the decision in the case of Kajal (Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court by observing in paragraph No.7 as under:
"7. It was also argued that in a judgment reported as Kajal v. Jagdish Chand2, the injured was a 12 years old girl who had suffered an injury to the extent that her IQ got less than 20% as compared to a child of her age and the medical board had assessed her social age to be only of a 9-months' old child. This Court had recognized that Schedule II of the Act could be used as a guide for the multiplier to be applied in each case. This Court in the aforesaid case held as under
(SCC pp. 419, 421 & 426, paras 6, 12 & 27) "6. It is impossible to equate human suffering and personal deprivation with money. However, this is what the Act enjoins upon the courts to do. The court has to make a judicious attempt to award damages, so as to compensate the claimant for the loss suffered by the victim. On the one hand, the compensation should not be assessed very conservatively, but on the other hand, the compensation should also not be assessed in so liberal a fashion so as to make it a bounty to the claimant. The court while assessing the compensation should have regard to the degree of deprivation and the loss caused by such deprivation. Such compensation is what is termed as just compensation. The compensation or damages assessed for personal injuries should be substantial to compensate the injured for the deprivation suffered by the injured throughout his/her life. They should not be Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined just token damages.
xxx xxx xxx
12. The assessment of damages in personal injury cases raises great difficulties. It is not easy to convert the physical and mental loss into monetary terms. There has to be a measure of calculated guesswork and conjecture.
An assessment, as best as can, in the circumstances, should be made.
xxx xxx xxx
27. One factor which must be kept in mind while assessing the compensation in a case like the present one is that the claim can be awarded only once. The claimant cannot come back to court for enhancement of award at a later stage praying that something extra has been spent. Therefore, the courts or the Tribunals assessing the compensation in a case of 100% disability, especially where there is mental disability also, should take a liberal view of the matter when awarding the compensation. While awarding this amount, we are not only taking the physical disability but also the mental disability and various other factors. This child will remain bedridden for life. Her mental age will be that of a nine-month-old child. Effectively, while her body grows, she will remain a small baby. We are dealing with a girl who will physically become a woman but will mentally remain a 9-month-old child. This girl will miss out playing with her friends. She cannot communicate; she cannot enjoy the pleasures of life; she cannot even be amused by watching cartoons or films; she will miss out the fun of childhood, the excitement of youth; the pleasures of a marital life; she cannot have children who she can love, let alone grandchildren. She will have no pleasure. Her's is a vegetable existence. Therefore, we feel in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case even after taking a very conservative view of the matter an amount payable for the pain and suffering of this child should be at least Rs 15,00,000."
Thus, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case of minor had considered multiplier of 18. As the learned Tribunal has relied on Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kajal (Supra), no error has been committed by the learned Tribunal in considering the injury to the minor in relying on the decision in the case of Kajal (Supra).
[5.2] Further, the compensation has to be awarded once and for all as victim is not at fault and it is the duty of the Tribunal to award just compensation. Considering overall facts and circumstances relating to treatment, mental agony, pain, disablement, loss of wages and expenditure in the hospital for nutritious diet and other expenditure incurred by the family members and other charges for attendant is also required to be considered. Considering the disablement and mental pain, shock and suffering qua loss of amenities, learned Tribunal has properly considered all the aspects and awarded just compensation on the head of non-pecuniary damages also. It is also pertinent to note that adopting a sensitive approach is crucial for the Tribunal. It plays a key and vital role in ensuring not only justice to the victim of the motor accident but also to determine just and fair compensation. The Tribunal is expected to have empathy and to prevent subsequent trauma by taking a sensitive approach to feeling the pain of the victim of the road accident because the victim of the road accident and their family often deal with physical and emotional trauma and an empathetic approach can provide them a sense of support and understanding.
[6.0] So far as the argument on behalf of the appellant - insurance company that interest on future prospects ought not to have been awarded by the learned Tribunal is concerned, the said argument is not accepted. In this regard, reference is required to be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Oriental Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Niru @ Niharika & Ors. reported in 2025 INSC 822 as well as the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sidram vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited and Anr. reported in (2023) 3 SCC 439, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court relying on its decision in the case of Pappu Deo Yadav vs. Naresh Kumar reported in (2022) 13 SCC 790 has observed and held in paragraph 113 as under:
"113. Before we close this matter, it needs to be underlined, as observed in Pappu Deo Yadav (supra) that Courts should be mindful that a serious injury not only permanently imposes physical limitations and disabilities but too often inflicts deep mental and emotional scars upon the victim. The attendant trauma of the victim's having to live in a world entirely different from the one she or he is born into, as an invalid, and with degrees of dependence on others, robbed of complete personal choice or autonomy, should forever be in the judge's mind, whenever tasked to adjudge compensation claims. Severe limitations inflicted due to such injuries undermine the dignity (which is now recognized as an intrinsic component of the right to life under Article 21 of the individual, thus depriving the person of the essence of the right to a wholesome life which she or he had lived, hitherto. From the world of the able bodied, the victim is thrust into the world of the disabled, itself most discomfiting and unsettling. If courts nit-pick and award niggardly amounts oblivious of these circumstances, there is resultant affront to the injured victim."
[7.0] In wake of aforesaid conspectus and in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Master Ayush (Supra), no interference is called for by this Court and hence, present First Appeal stands dismissed at admission stage.
[8.0] The appellant - insurance company is directed to deposit the entire amount of compensation as awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special), Rajkot in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.58 of 2010 vide the impugned judgment and award dated 11.03.2025 alongwith accrued interest at the rate of 9% per annum on Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4165/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined the said amount within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order with the learned Tribunal.
[9.0] After deposit of the amount of compensation by the appellant - insurance company, the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant and/or her guardian and father through RTGS, after proper verification. The bank account details shall be furnished by the learned advocate for the claimant to the Nazir Department of the learned Tribunal concerned. The Court fees, if any, payable by the claimant on compensation be deducted from the said amount and the remaining amount of compensation be disbursed in favour of the claimant on due verification within a period of two weeks thereafter.
[10.0] Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Pending civil applications, if any, also shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Ajay Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:35:17 IST 2025