Gujarat High Court
Ashokbhai Naginbhai Monani vs Neptune Tours And Travels on 6 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 839 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
ASHOKBHAI NAGINBHAI MONANI & ANR.
Versus
NEPTUNE TOURS AND TRAVELS & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PREMAL S RACHH(3297) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 4
MS KARUNA V RAHEVAR(3818) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 06/08/2025
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
30/11/2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Auxi.), Jamnagar in MACP No.807 of 1999.
2. Short facts of the claim case reads as under:
2.1. On 08/09/1999, the appellant-original claimants and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
deceased Kaminiben and other passengers were travelling in
luxury bus bearing registration no.GJ-1-X-9293 of Ashvamegh
Travels for Jamnagar to Ahmedabad and in the early morning
about 5:00 a.m. at Limdi-Ahmedabad National Highway, near
village Vastadi when the bus was going in full speed colluded
with one private bus bearing registration no.GJ-5-Z-2323
coming from opposite side and thereby accident occurred. In
the said unfortunate accident, Kaminiben sustained serious
injuries and succumbed to the same.
2.2. Legal heirs and representatives of the deceased
Kaminiben filed claim petition under the provision of Section
166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of
Rs.7,00,000/- against the respondents.
2.3. Vide the said impugned judgment and award, the
Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the
present appellants - original claimants holding the present
appellants- original claimants entitled to an amount of
Rs.4,33,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from
the date of filing of such claim petition till its actual
realization with proportionate costs.
3. This Court vide order dated 08/06/2015, noticing the
submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellants-
original claimants and the grounds raised in the appeal, has
admitted the appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding inadequate
compensation to the claimants and has failed to appreciate
the evidence on record in its true perspective. It is also
submitted that the Tribunal has not properly assessed the
income of the deceased and has overlooked the settled
principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
relation to the assessment of conventional heads such as loss
of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses. 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. 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.
4.1. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants
has assailed the impugned judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly
considered income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/- per month
only without appreciating the evidence produced on record.
Learned advocate has submitted that the tribunal has also
erred in considering the multiplier. Learned advocate has
submitted that the amount awarded under the conventional
heads are also on the lower side. He has submitted that
considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd Vs.
Pranay Sethi, reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, 40% towards
future prospects of income is required to be taken into
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
consideration. As regards the amount awarded under the
head of loss of consortium is concerned, learned advocate has
invited my attention to the fact that the deceased was having
two dependents and therefore, entitled to enhance amount of
compensation towards loss of consortium in light 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. He urged
therefore to enhance the amount of loss of consortium
Rs.96,800/- (Rs.48,400/- x 2). Learned advocate has lastly
submitted that the amount awarded under the conventional
heads, more particularly, towards funeral and transportation
expenses and loss of estate is also required to be enhanced to
Rs.18,150/- respectively, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). By
making the aforesaid submissions, learned advocate has
urged this Court to enhance the amount of compensation
accordingly which may be awarded with interest at the rate of
9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its
actual realization.
5. Learned advocate Ms. Karuna Rahewar appearing for
respondent no.2- insurance company has submitted that the
respondent claimant has not produced iota of evidence to
prove the income of the deceased. She has further submitted
that whenever there is no any income proof produce by the
claimant, the court must consider the rate of minimum wages
and vehemently argued that in the year 1999 rate of minimum
wages was Rs.1,900/- per month and it should be considered.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
She has further submitted that husband of the deceased
remarried after the accident and therefore, he is not entitled
to consortium benefit. She has further submitted that when
income of the deceased is not proved, the claimants are not
entitled for the prospective income and submitted that
tribunal has awarded just, proper and reasonable amount of
compensation and the same is not required to be interfered by
this Court in this appeal and lastly prayed to dismiss the
appeal.
6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties on
the disputes between the parties in narrow compass and
perused the record and proceedings and impugned judgment
and award, more particularly, the findings and reasons
assigned by the Tribunal while considering the issue of
quantum of compensation.
7. Considering the facts of the case and rival contentions of
learned advocates of the concerned parties and also perused
the impugned judgment, learned tribunal assessed income of
the deceased only Rs.2,000/- per month.
8. Learned advocate for the insurance company vehemently
argued on the point of income and submitted that whenever
there is no income proof, rate of minimum wages should be
applied and in the year 1999, rate of minimum wages was
Rs.1,900/- per month.
9. Considering the fact and para-11 of the impugned
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
judgment and award, it appears from the record that the
deceased was educated lady. Original claimants produced
certificate of higher secondary examination vide Exh.56
issued by the Gujarat State Education Board, Gandhinagar.
She was young lady of 22 years at the time of accident and
she had a good opportunities for further education and for
bright future life of herself and her family. Under the
circumstances, notional income of the deceased should be
considered as Rs.3,000/- per month which would be just,
proper and reasonable.
10. Further, as regards the submissions made by the learned
advocate for the appellants on the assessment of the income
of the deceased is concerned, the Tribunal has committed
error in assessing the income of the deceased to the extent of
Rs.2,000/- per month only. Noticing the activity with which
the deceased was associated and the evidence produced in
that regard, this Court is inclined to enhance the income in
view of the aforesaid. Thus, the income of the deceased is
determined as Rs.3,000/- per month.
11. As regards the future prospect is concerned, in view of
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Pranay Sethi (supra) noticing the young age of the deceased
of 22 years at the time of the accident and noticing the fact
that deceased was doing work of tuition and work of
goldsmith, 40% amount can be considered towards the future
prospects of the deceased. As rightly recorded by the
Tribunal, considering the fact that the deceased was having
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
two dependents, 1/3rd deduction has been applied towards
spend by the deceased herself. Thus, the calculation of the
prospective income of the deceased at the rate of 40% is
considered as Rs.3,000/-*40% (Rs.1,200/-) = Rs.4,200/-. After
1/3rd deduction towards personal expense of the deceased,
the calculation of the income the deceased is Rs.2,800/-
(Rs.4,200/- - Rs.1,400/- = Rs.2,800/-). Noticing the fact that
the deceased was aged 22 years at the time of accident, in
light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Sarla Verma and ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
and Anr. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and the schedule
prescribed, multiplier of 18 would be appropriate. Thus, the
future loss benefit is determined as Rs.2800/-*12*18
(Multiplier) which comes to Rs.6,04,800/-. As rightly prayed
for by the learned advocate for the appellants in view of the
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma
General Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra), the claimants would
be entitled to enhance amount of compensation under the
head of loss of consortium to the tune of Rs.96,800/-
(Rs.48,400/- X 2). Lastly, the amount awarded under the
conventional heads, more particularly, funeral and
transportation 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.
12. Therefore, original claimants - appellants herein are
entitled to enhanced amount as computed hereunder:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
Compensation As per award under As awarded by this
challenge (Rs.) Court (Rs.)
Actual salary/ 2,000/- 3,000/-
income
Prospective income - 1,200/- (40%)
amount spent by
the deceased on
herself
Total dependency Rs.4,08,000/- Rs.6,04,800/-
loss
Funeral expenses Rs.5,000/- Rs,18,150/-
Loss of estate - Rs.18,150/-
For loss of Rs.20,000/- Rs.96,800/-
consortium (Rs.48,400/- X 2)
Total Rs.4,33,000/- Rs.7,37,900/-
Enhanced amount - Rs.7,37,900/- -
of compensation Rs.4,33,000/-
=Rs.3,04,900/-
Rate of interest 7.5% 9%
13. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned judgment and
award dated 30/11/2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Auxi.), Jamnagar in MACP No.807 of 1999 is hereby
modified. The appellants-original claimant are held entitled to
total compensation of an amount of Rs.7,37,900/-. Since by
impugned judgment and award the Tribunal has awarded an
amount of Rs.4,33,000/-, the appellants shall be entitled to
enhanced amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.3,04,900/-
(Rs.7,37,900/- - Rs.4,33,000/- = Rs.3,04,900/-) with
interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of claim
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/839/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
petition till its actual realization. The respondents- original
opponents are held liable to pay such enhanced amount of
compensation as per the award of the tribunal.
14. 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 release and
disburse the entire award amount in favour of the original
claimants, after due verification as per the original judgment
and award.
15. 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.
16. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned
tribunal forthwith, if received.
(D. M. VYAS, J)
ILA
