Gujarat High Court
Naniben Wd/O Chandulal Vajabhai Jadav vs Takhatsinh Mansinh Jadav on 29 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 305 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
NANIBEN WD/O CHANDULAL VAJABHAI JADAV & ANR.
Versus
TAKHATSINH MANSINH JADAV & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR VC THOMAS(5476) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 29/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present Appeal arises from the impugned judgment and award dated 20.10.2014 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Panchmahal at Godhara in MACP No.1426 of 1998.
2. By way of the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal was pleased to partly allow the claim petition and award a sum of Rs.1,65,400/- along with the proportionate costs Page 1 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined and interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its actual realization.
3. The accident in question involved one Ramanbhai Chandubhai Jadav who was alleged to be of 29 years of age at the relevant point of time. It appears that the said Mr. Ramanbhai Jadav was out to attend a call of nature on 27.05.1998, walking on the left side of the road. At that time, at about 6:30 in the evening, a Truck bearing registration no. GRW/458, being driven by the opponent no.1, came from behind and collided with the said Mr.Ramanbhai Chandubhai Jadav. As a result of the said accident, the said Mr. Ramanbhai Jadav sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the said injuries within an hour of the accident.
4. By way of the present Appeal, only the findings from the impugned judgment and award pertaining to the quantum have been challenged before this Court. It may be noted that vide the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has been pleased to attribute 100% negligence to the opponent no.1, who was driving the Truck involved in the accident.
Page 2 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined
5. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
6. The learned advocate Mr. Hiren Modi, appearing for the appellants-original claimants, who had initiated the concerned claim petition proceedings, submitted that the heirs are respectively the mother and brother of the deceased. It was submitted that appropriate evidence was led by these individuals and that it was alleged that the deceased was a skilled carpenter and was earning a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month. It was submitted that in that count, the Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/-. It was fairly considered by the learned advocate for the appellant that qua the said findings i.e, Rs.2,000/- per month being the income of the deceased, there is no objection. However, it is submitted that insofar as the future prospects are concerned, the Tribunal has awarded 30%. It was submitted that in the present proceedings, the age of the deceased was 29 years. It was also submitted that there is no evidence except the Post-Mortem Note at Exhibit-22 indicating the age of the deceased. It was submitted that in the said Post-Mortem Note at Exhibit-22, the age of the deceased has been Page 3 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined described as 26 years. However, it was submitted that as per the impugned judgment and award, the age of the deceased has been taken to be of 29 years. He, however, submitted that irrespective of the age either being 29 years or being 26 years, for all practical purposes, the multiplier remains unchanged. In any case, it was submitted before this Court that as per the deposition of one Mr. Jayantibhai Chandubhai Jadav at Exhibit-32, he has deposed that the deceased was of 29 years of age. It was thus submitted that this Court may take the age of the deceased to be of 29 years. It was submitted that in the circumstances, in terms of the ratio in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Pranay Sethi reported at 2017 (16) SCC 680, the applicable future prospects to the deceased would be to the tune of 40%. He thus submitted that the Tribunal, while holding the future prospects at 30%, has committed an errors and interference in this behalf by this Court may kindly be made.
7. It was next submitted that so computed, i.e., adding 40% to the amount of Rs.2,000/-, being the monthly income, the monthly income for the purpose of deciding the present Page 4 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined matter shall have to be taken at Rs.2,800/- per month (Rs.2,000/- + 40% of Rs.2,000/-). It was further submitted that insofar as the deduction of the personal expenses to the tune of 50% is concerned, the Tribunal has correctly deducted one half of the income of the deceased. Thereafter, the income will have to be multiplied by 12 so as to come at the multiplicand. It was next submitted that the Tribunal has committed another error by deiciding the multiplier in the present case to be based on the age of the mother of the deceased. It was submitted that the same may be corrected and accordingly, it was urged that taking the age of the deceased to be either 26 years or 29 years, the applicable multiplier would be 17. Accordingly, he urged this Court to compute the loss of dependency applicable to the present case.
8. It was submitted that in the present case, the present appellants, who were the original claimants, are respectively the mother and brother of the deceased. The learned advocate during the course of the argument has indicated that he is not pressing for consortium amount in respect of the claimant no.2, (the appellant no.2 herein), Page 5 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined the said appellant no.2 being the brother of the deceased. It was submitted that as such, the brother of the deceased would not be entitled to the loss of consortium, and therefore, the amount of consortium may kindly be paid, only to the mother of the deceased. However, it was submitted that no amount under the head of loss of consortium appears to have been awarded to the mother of the deceased. Instead, a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards the loss of love and affections has been awarded by the Tribunal. He, thus, submitted that instead of the amount under the head of loss of love and affection, loss of consortium to the tune of Rs.48,400/- may kindly be awarded to the mother of the deceased. He next submitted that insofar as the funeral expenses is concerned, as per the recent case-laws, a sum of Rs.18,150/- may kindly be awarded towards the funeral expenses. He further submitted that insofar as the loss of estate is concerned, no amount under the head of the loss of estate has been awarded by the Tribunal. He, thus, urged this Court that under the said head also, a sum of Rs.18,150/- may kindly be awarded. He next submitted that insofar as the interest is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate Page 6 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined of 9% per annum. It was submitted that as the impugned judgment and award has not been challenged by the Insurance Company, the said rate of interest may kindly be maintained insofar as the enhancement, if any, which may be awarded by this Court.
9. Though the matter was called out, no one has appeared on behalf of the respondent no.1. On perusal of the record, it appears that the said respondent has not caused any appearance either personally or through advocate, despite the Rule in the matter having been served on to them.
10. Insofar as the learned advocate for the respondent no.3 - Insurance Company, i.e., United India Insurance Company Limited, Mr. M R Prajapati for the learned advocate Mr. V C Thomas, has submitted that as such, if the monthly income of the deceased is not even sought to be disturbed by the other side, by and large, he does not have any objection to the enhancement sought by the learned advocate for the appellant, for the reason that the said enhancement are in tune with the applicable case laws to the facts in the present matter. He has, thus, urged this Court to consider the arguments of the learned advocate Page 7 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined for the appellant and pass appropriate order. He however submitted that the interest rate, as awarded by the Tribunal, is 9%, which is not in sync with the applicable banking interest rate prevalent as on date. He, thus, submitted that the interest rate of 9% as provided in the impugned judgment and award by the Tribunal may kindly be revised to the rate of 7.5%.
11. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties, this Court proceeds to decide the present Appeal in terms appearing hereinafter.
12. The point of determination that arises before this Court in the present matter is whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is fair, just and reasonable? If not, what would be the just, fair and reasonable compensation is liable to be awarded in the present facts and circumstances of the case?
13. At the outset, as such the learned advocate for the appellant has not contended for increase in the monthly income of the deceased. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the same. Even otherwise, for a carpenter, who Page 8 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined does not have any proof of income in the year and who was passed away in the year of 1998, the monthly income is fairly judged by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- per month. However, this Court finds that subsequently, in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), the award of future prospects income has been standardized and as per the ratio in Paragraph- 59.4 of the Pranay Sethi (supra), the future prospects of income liable to be awarded in the present case would be to the tune of 40%. As such, the deceased is 26 years of age in terms of the Post-Mortem Note and in terms of the affidavit of examination-in-chief at Exhibit-32, is alleged to be of 29 years at the time of the accident. In either case, i.e., whether the deceased is held to be as 29 years of age or to be as 26 years of age, there is no change in awarding of future prospects in terms of Pranay Sethi (supra). Accordingly, this Court holds that the future prospects liable to be awarded in the present case would be to the tune of 40%. And for abundant caution, the relevant paragraph i.e., Paragraph-59.4 of the Pranay Sethi (supra) reported at 2017 (16) SCC 680, is quoted hereinbelow for the ease of reference:
Page 9 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined "(iv) In case the deceased was self-employed or on a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income should be the warrant where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. An addition of 25% where the deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years and 10% where the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years should be regarded as the necessary method of computation. The established income means the income minus the tax component."
Moving on, once 40% future prospects of income is applied, the monthly income would be enhanced to Rs.2,800/-.
14. Insofar as the deduction of personal expenses is concerned, the Tribunal has rightly deducted 50% of the monthly income of the deceased. However, as the monthly income itself has increased from that which has been stated in the impugned judgment and award, this Court holds that 50% of Rs.2,800/- would be Rs.1,400/-. This makes the annual income of the deceased as Rs.16,800/-, which would be the multiplicand in the present matter. Insofar as the multiplier is concerned, in terms of the judgment in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr reported at 2009 (2) SCC (CRI) 1002, the applicable multiplier would be to the tune of 17, Page 10 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined considering the age of the deceased. The paragraph of Sarla Verma (supra) reads as follows:
"We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as mentioned in column (4) of the Table above (prepared by applying Susamma Thomas, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years."
15. Hence, the loss of dependency would be to the tune of Rs.2,85,600/- (Rs.16,800 X 17).
16. As is apparent, the original claimants and consequently, the present appellants are the mother and brother of the deceased. The learned advocate has not pressed for the loss of consortium in respect of the appellant no.2, as he is the brother of the deceased, and therefore, this Court is not inclined to examine the said issue in the present matter. Needless to say that the consortium would be to the tune of Rs.48,400/- insofar as the mother, the appellant no.1 herein is concerned. Insofar as the heads of Page 11 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined Funeral Expenses and Loss of Estate are concerned, under each head, a sum of Rs.18,150/- is liable to be awarded. Hence, the total amount liable to be awarded would be Rs.3,70,300/- that being the aggregate of Rs.2,85,600/- (Loss of Dependency); Rs.48,400/- (Loss of Consortium); Rs.18,150/- (Loss of Estate) and Rs.18,150/- (Funeral Expenses). As such, the Tribunal has already awarded a sum of Rs.1,65,400/-, and therefore, the enhanced amount in the present matter would come to Rs.2,04,900/- (Rs.3,70,300/- less Rs.1,65,400/-).
17. Now, insofar as the rate of interest is concerned, as such, the Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its actual realization, which this Court is inclined to uphold. The reason for so accepting is that that no appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company and thus, without such appeal, in an appeal of the claimants, the interest cannot simply be reduced. And secondly, as such, this Court is of the view that 9% interest would be fair, considering that for the accident is of the Year-1998, the enhancement is being awarded in the Year-2025. As such, this Court believes Page 12 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/305/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined that considering the inflationary trends, so as to reasonably be close to the purchase power of the compensation as has been awarded, it is only fair that 9% of interest rate is maintained. Accordingly, this Court holds that the applicable rate of interest would be to the tune of 9%.
18. Accordingly, the present Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. The Insurance Company - respondent no.3 shall deposit the enhanced amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the signed copy of the Order. Once such amount has been deposited with the Tribunal, the Tribunal shall forthwith disburse the amount without creating any further FDRs considering that the accident is of the Year-1998.
19. The Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent and disposed of, accordingly. The R&P be sent back to the Tribunal, forthwith.
(J. L. ODEDRA, J) JIGAR J RABARI Page 13 of 13 Uploaded by MR.JIGAR JIVANBHAI RABARI(HCD0067) on Mon Sep 29 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 21:47:38 IST 2025