Gujarat High Court
Madhavjibhai Arjanbhai Leuva vs Gsrtc on 22 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2240 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
MADHAVJIBHAI ARJANBHAI LEUVA & ANR.
Versus
GSRTC & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HK PARMAR(1220) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR C S SHUKLA(7549) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 22/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal is filed by the original claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1988") being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award dated 24.03.2003 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Amreli in MACP No.383/1996.
2. The facts of the case are that on 03.06.1996 on Amreli-
Lati road between Ishwaria-Varasad Village, the Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined accident was happened between S.T. Bus No.GJ 18 V 546 and Luxury Bus NO.GJ 4 T 3083. The deceased was travelling in S.T. Bus and when the said bus reached near village Ishwaria-Varasada at the relevant time driver of the Luxury Bus came with an excessive speed rashly and negligently and dashed with the ST Bus. The daughter of the applicants was succumbed to her injuries sustained in the accident. Hence, they have filed the aforesaid claim petition against the respondent to claim compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- with interest.
3. Vide the said impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the present appellants - original claimants under Section 166 of the Act, 1988 holding the present appellants- original claimants entitled to an amount of Rs.28,600/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of such claim petition till its actual realization with proportionate costs.
4. This Court vide order dated 22.09.2014 noticing the submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellants- original claimants and the grounds raised in the appeal, has admitted the appeal.
5. Learned Counsel Mr. H K Parmar appearing for the appellants, while assailing the impugned judgment and award, raised contention with regard to the issue of quantum and submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding inadequate compensation to the Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined claimants and has failed to appreciate the evidence on record in its true perspective. It is contended that the tribunal committed an error while assessing the income of the deceased to the extent of Rs.900/- per month only and has not considered the evidence on record. It is submitted that the deceased was to be appointed as a nurse and her average future notional income would be Rs.6500/- per month. It is further argued that the tribunal has overlooked the settled principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in relation to the assessment of future prospects, dependency, and grant of compensation under conventional heads such as loss of consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses.
6. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has awarded a meager and unrealistic amount under various heads without considering the financial dependency of the family members and the socio-economic background of the deceased/injured. The learned counsel has urged that the compensation awarded is not just, fair, and reasonable, and is liable to be enhanced in accordance with the settled legal principles.
7. Learned advocate Mr. C S Shukla appearing for the respondent no.1 and Mr. G C Mazumdar, learned Counsel for the respondent no.3 - Insurance Company has placed reliance upon the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal and vehemently argued that the compensation must be awarded as just, proper and reasonable and not higher side. It is further submitted Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined that learned Tribunal, after appreciating the materials available on record, awarded the compensation under each head is just, proper and reasonable and not required to interfere and lastly prayed to dismiss the appeal.
8. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties on the disputes between the parties in narrow compass, perused the impugned judgment and award passed by the tribunal and material available on record, more particularly, the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal while considering the issue of quantum of compensation.
9. As regards the findings of the tribunal on assessing the income of the deceased is concerned, the claimant i.e., the mother of the deceased, submitted in her oral evidence that the deceased was to be appointed as nurse and therefore her future income would have been around Rs.5,000/- per month. The tribunal rejected the said contention by holding it as only a presumption and that there is no appointment order. However, learned Counsel for the applicant has produced the certificate issued by General Hospital, Amreli dated 20.06.1996 in which it is stated that the deceased was selected in the training and passed the examination after the training. After passing the said examination, she was to be appointed on contractual basis. It is to be noted that the said certificate was issued after the death of the deceased. Notwithstanding the fact that the same was Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined issued after the death of deceased, the income assessed by the tribunal is still on the lower side and the same deserves to be enhanced. Hence, looking to the overall evidence on record and the rate prevailed at that time, income of Rs.1200/- per month shall meet the ends of justice.
10. As per the PM Note, the deceased was aged about 24 years, which was confirmed by the tribunal. Sofar as future prospect is concerned, the tribunal has not given any future prospect. However, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157 noticing the age of the deceased as 24 years, 40% amount can be considered towards the future prospects of the deceased. Considering the fact that the deceased bachelor, as per the ratio laid down in the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma and ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, 50% deduction is required to be applied towards spend by the deceased on herself. Thus, the calculation of the prospective income of the deceased at the rate of 40% is considered as Rs.1200/- * 40% (Rs.480) = Rs.1680/-. After 50% deduction towards personal expense of the deceased, the calculation of the income the deceased is Rs.840.
11. Noticing the fact that the deceased was aged 24 years at the time of accident, in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined and ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. (supra) and the scheduled prescribed, multiplier of 18 is required to be applied in the facts of the case. Thus, the future loss benefit is determined as Rs.840/-*12*18 (Multiplier) which comes to Rs.1,81,440/-.
12. This brings me to the issue of loss of consortium. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhur Ram & Ors reported in (2018)18 SCC 130, the claimants would be entitled to get compensation under the head of loss of consortium to the tune of Rs.96,800/- (Rs.48,400/- X 2). Lastly, the amount to be awarded under the conventional heads, more particularly, funeral expenses and the loss of estate is also required to be reconsidered in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). The same is to be considered as Rs.18,150/- respectively.
13. Therefore, original claimants - appellants herein are entitled to enhanced amount as computed hereunder:
Compensation As awarded by this Court (Rs.) Actual salary/ income 1200/- (monthly) Prospective income 40% (Total: 1680) Deduction of amount ½ (840) spent by the deceased on himself Multiplier 18 Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined Future Loss 840*12*18 = Rs.1,81,440/-
For loss of consortium 96,800/- (48,400/- X 2)
Loss of Estate 18,150/-
Funeral expenses and 18,150/-
transportation
Total Compensation Rs.3,14,540/-
Enhanced compensation Rs.2,86,000/- (Rounded off)
14. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned judgment and award dated 24.03.2003 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Amreli in MACP No.383 of 1996 hereby modified. The appellants- original claimant are held entitled to compensation of an amount of Rs.3,14,540/-. Since by impugned judgment and award the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.28,600/-, the appellants shall be entitled to enhanced amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.2,86,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of claim petition till its actual realization on the enhanced amount. The respondents - original opponents are held jointly and severally liable to pay such enhanced amount of compensation with proportionate costs and interest. Rest of the order passed by Tribunal is hereby confirmed.
15. Let, the aforesaid amount be deposited with the concerned Tribunal within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the present order. On deposit of the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal shall be at liberty to Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2240/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined release and disburse the entire award amount in favour of the original claimant, after due verification as per the original judgment and award.
16. Let, such exercise be undertaken by the Tribunal strictly in accordance with the guidelines prescribed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard; preferably within a period of two weeks from deposit of such amount. The Tribunal is directed to realize the deficit Court fees before proceeding with the disbursement of the amount.
17. R&P be sent back to the concerned tribunal forthwith, if received.
(D. M. VYAS, J) Anuj Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by MR.ANUJSINH CHANDRAVIRSINH SISODIYA(HCD0069) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 22:06:11 IST 2025