Gujarat High Court
Meeraben W/O Nanjibhai Maheshwari vs Chetanram Khemaram Chaudhari on 25 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/940/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 940 of 2016
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
MEERABEN W/O NANJIBHAI MAHESHWARI & ORS.
Versus
CHETANRAM KHEMARAM CHAUDHARI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR.KISHAN PRAJAPATI(7074) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR SANDIP C SHAH(792) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 25/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 30.09.2015 passed by the learned Tribunal (Auxiliary), Gandhidham at Kutch in MACP No.615/2008, whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.3,81,000/- as a compensation along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.
2. The succinct facts leading to file the present appeal are that on 27.12.2008 at about 21:00 am, Nanjibhai Jumabhai Maheshwari was going towards Tagore Road from water tank after completing Sunderpuri Bazar work, in the meantime, respondent no.1 herein came Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Thu Nov 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 27 21:24:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/940/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/11/2025 undefined by driving a truck bearing registration no.GJ-12-Y-7162 in rash and negligent manner at excessive speed and caused the accident. In the said accident, Nanjibhai Jumabhai Maheshwari sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries. It is also the case of the appellants before the learned Tribunal that the accident has occurred owing to the sole negligence of respondent no.1/driver of the truck. At the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 42 years and was earning Rs.6,000/- per month by running camel cart.
3. On being served, the respondent no.3/insurance company has filed the written statement at Exh.15, thereby denying all the averments made in the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
4. Having considered the the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.3,81,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.
5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the appellants herein challenged the award on the point of quantum.
6. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
7. Mr. Vishal C. Mehta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal has not considered the prospective income of the deceased. He further submitted that it is not disputed that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 42 years, therefore, the monthly notional Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Thu Nov 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 27 21:24:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/940/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/11/2025 undefined income ought to have been enhanced by 25% on account of the future prospects of the deceased. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded the meager amount under the heads of loss of consortium, funeral expenses and loss of estate. Therefore, the compensation awarded under these heads are also required to be enhanced in accordance to the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and Ors., reported in 2018 (18) SCC 130.
8. On the other hand, Mr. Sandip C. Shah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.3/insurance company vehemently submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and award. Therefore, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.
9. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and having gone through the record, it is to be noted that the negligence, age and income are not disputed. The learned Tribunal has determined the income of the deceased as Rs.36,000/- per month; however, the learned Tribunal has not enhanced the income on account of future prospects of the deceased. It is not in dispute that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 42 years, therefore, in view of the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), the 25% of the notional income is to be added on account of future prospects of the deceased. Therefore, after adding 25% to the monthly income of Rs.3,000/-, the total monthly notional income for calculating the loss of dependency would come to Rs.3,750/- i.e. (3,000+3,000X25%). It is not in dispute that at the time of accident, Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Thu Nov 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 27 21:24:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/940/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/11/2025 undefined the deceased was survived by five claimants. Therefore, ¼ of the monthly income is required to be deducted on account of the personal expenses of the deceased. Therefore, after deducting ¼ of the monthly notional income, the monthly income for calculating the loss of dependency would come to Rs.2,813/- i.e. (3,750-3,750X1/4). it is on record that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 42 years, therefore, the multiplier of 14 is required to be applied. Therefore, after applying the multiplier of 14, the total loss of dependency would come to Rs.4,72,584/- i.e. (2,813X12X14). The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- under the head of loss of consortium though, it is on record that the deceased was survived by her widow and four minor children. Therefore, all the claimants/appellants are entitled for loss of consortium in accordance to the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (supra). Thus, a sum of Rs.2,42,000/- is awarded under the head of loss of consortium to all the five appellants.
10. It is on record that the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head of funeral expenses and a sum of Rs.25,000/- under the head of loss of estate. The compensation awarded under these heads also required to be modified in view of the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) and Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (supra). Accordingly, a sum of Rs.18,150/- is awarded under the head of funeral expenses and a sum of Rs.18,150/- is awarded under the head of loss of estate.
11. Thus, in view of the above discussions, the appellants shall be entitled for the following compensation under the following heads:-
Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Thu Nov 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 27 21:24:11 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/940/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/11/2025 undefined Sr. No. Particular Amount
1. Loss of dependency 4,72,584/-
2. Loss of consortium 2,42,000/-
3. Loss of estate 18,150/-
4. Funeral expenses 18,150/-
Total 7,50,884/-
12. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,81,000/-, therefore, the appellants/claimants shall be entitled for the additional compensation of Rs.3,69,884/- i.e. (7,50,884-3,81,000). The learned Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of 9% per annum. The said rate of interest is maintained and accordingly, the appellants/claimants shall be entitled for interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the additional amount of compensation.
13. In view of above discussions, the captioned appeal stands allowed partly. The respondent no.3/insurance company is directed to deposit the additional amount of compensation along with interest within a period of four weeks from today. Upon depositing of the said amount, the learned Tribunal shall disburse the said amount, after deducting deficit of Court fee, if any, after due verification. The amount, if any, lying deposited with the registry of this Court, the same shall be transmitted to the learned Tribunal concerned forthwith. No order as to costs.
14. Record & Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the learned Tribunal concerned.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) HARSHIT Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Thu Nov 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 27 21:24:11 IST 2025