Gujarat High Court
Nima Huma Solanki vs Sohansinh on 11 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/42/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 42 of 2009
==========================================================
NIMA HUMA SOLANKI
Versus
SOHANSINH & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS ARCHANA U AMIN(2462) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 11/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant - original
claimant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and
award dated 22.08.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Fast Track Court No.3, Ahmedabad in Motor Accident
Claim Petition No.425 of 2001.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
2.1 On 18.08.1999, the claimant working in Western Railway
with other employees was travelling in Mini Truck No.GJ-1-G-
6063, which is ownership of Union of India. Said Truck was
driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and therefore,
claimant and other employees fell from the truck and sustain
serious injuries. The claimant got fracture injuries and his leg
was 3" short. Therefore, claimant filed claim petition seeking
compensation.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/42/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
3. On two grounds, learned advocate Mr. Modi for the
appellant - claimant has assailed impugned judgment. He would
submit that learned Tribunal committed error in taking
contributory negligence of claimant to 20%. Claimant was
travelling in Truck belonging to Government and fell on road as
truck driver suddenly took turn in rainy season on wet road. The
claimant having been imbalanced fell on road. Considering this
aspect, 20% negligence attributed to the claimant is
impermissible and requires to be set aside. Learned advocate
Mr.Modi submitted that claimant was serving as Gangman in
Railways. The claimant has produced salary certificate at
Exh.59, which indicates that monthly salary of the claimant
being Rs.4637/-. Learned Tribunal unnecessarily deducted
deductions except deduction towards professional tax. It is
submitted that when income of the claimant is to be considered,
all emoluments received at the time of accident is also required
to be taken into consideration. Therefore, Rs.4400/- is to be
taken as monthly income of the claimant. Since claimant was
government employee, having consistent rise in income, 50%
should be calculated towards future prospects.
3.1. Mainly on above two grounds, it is submitted to allow the
appeal.
4. Per contra, learned advocate Ms.Amin submits that learned
Tribunal has rightly passed judgment and award and therefore,
no interference is required in the matter.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/42/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
5. Apt to note that the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is a beneficial
piece of Legislation. The concept of just and fair compensation is
integral and seminal to the MV Act. The compensation to be
awarded under the principle of just and fair compensation to the
injured of the road accident or the legal representative/s of the
deceased person is based on the principle of fairness,
reasonableness and equability. Anguish of the heart or for
mental turbulence being consequential result of the road
accident cannot be actually compensated, but the quint
essentiality lies in adopting holistic and pragmatic view to the
computation of the compensation for the loss sustained, which is
to be in the realm of realistic approximation. Although exact or
perfect arithmetical calculation of compensation for reparation of
the loss arrived from the road accident is almost impossible. The
Tribunal is bestowed with duty to make an endevour to award
just compensation regardless of the amount claimed by the
claimant. The determination of the quantum of compensation
therefore, must be liberal and not niggardly since the law values
life and limb in a free country in generous scale. Needless to
state that money may be awarded, so that something tangible
may be procured to reach something else of the like nature,
which has been destroyed or lost, but money cannot renew
physical frame that has been battered and shattered being a
result of the road accident. Yet Tribunal to endavour to bring
back victim to stage of pre-road accident as far as possible
Thus, the award must be reasonable and cannot be assessed
with moderation though it cannot at the same time be pity and
what could be granted must be just, fair and equitable
compensation.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/42/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
6. Having heard learned advocates for both the sides and
considering Record and Proceedings viz-a-viz finding of learned
Tribunal, it is admitted position that claimant at the time of
accident was standing in Government truck which was plying
near Morvani Railway Station. It was rainy season and road was
wet. Driver of truck without taking care suddenly took turn and
because of which claimant who was standing on the back side of
the truck was thrown and fell on the road and received injuries.
Learned Tribunal for no reasons assessed contributory
negligence of 20% to the claimant. It is case where truck driver
was found fully negligent in causing road accident. The claimant
was standing on the back side of the truck, he was not wrong
doer nor plying any other vehicle. Therefore, finding of the
learned Tribunal to attribute 20% negligence to the claimant is
erroneous and deserves to be set aside and accordingly, it is set
aside. Claimant was serving as Gangman in Railways. He has
produced salary certificate at Exh.59 showing amount of
Rs.4637/- per month as income after deducing professional tax.
Roughly it can be considered as Rs.4400/- per month as income
including all emoluments. It is settled principle that while fixing
income, all emoluments are required to be taken into
consideration for just and fair compensation. Accordingly,
Rs.4400/- is fixed as monthly income of the claimant and 50%
rise is given towards future prospects as claimant was serving as
Gangman in Railways having permanent source of income.
Multiplier of 15 taken by the learned Tribunal is not disturbed.
Compensation granted under other heads are just and fair.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/42/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
7. Therefore, total compensation would be as under, which
the claimant/s is/are entitled to get.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future loss of income 3,20,760/-
Rs.4400/- x 12 = Rs.52,800/- and
considering 50% prospective income
(Rs.26,400/-), the amount would be
Rs.79,200/- and considering 27% disability,
the amount would be Rs.21,384/- and
applying 15 multiplier, the total amount
would be Rs.3,20,760/-
Actual loss of income for four months 17,600/-
Pain, shock and suffering 15,000/-
Special diet, attendant, transportation 9,000/-
expenses
Medical expenses 6,000/-
Total... 3,68,360/-
Less : Amount which is already awarded 1,71,507/-
Additional amount which is awarded 1,96,853/-
8. Therefore, I hold that the claimant is entitled to get the
enhanced compensation of Rs.1,96,853/- with 8% p.a. interest
from the date of filing the claim petition till its realisation, which
would meet the ends of justice. Rest of the direction(s) of the
Tribunal remain same.
9. For the reasons recorded above, the following order is
passed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/42/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
9.1 The present appeal is partly allowed.
9.2 The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
enhanced amount Rs.1,96,853/- with 8% p.a. interest from the
date of claim petition till its realization before the concerned
Tribunal, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of
this order.
9.3 The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded amount
lying in the FDR and/or with the Tribunal, with accrued interest
thereon, if any, to the claimant, by account payee cheque /
NEFT / RTGS, after proper verification and after following due
procedure.
9.4 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the
courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
9.5 Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned
Tribunal, forthwith.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SATISH
