Gujarat High Court
Chaudhari Jagdishbhai Devjibhai vs Desai Jivrambhai Vihabhai on 30 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1360/2009 ORDER DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1360 of 2009
==========================================================
CHAUDHARI JAGDISHBHAI DEVJIBHAI
Versus
DESAI JIVRAMBHAI VIHABHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TEJAS P SATTA(3149) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2.1,2.2,2.3,3,4,5,6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 30/01/2025
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 27.3.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Mehsana in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.741 of
2002.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
2.1 On 19.2.2002, when the claimant was going as pillion
rider on the motorcycle, the offending vehicle dashed with the
motorcycle and thereby, the claimant received serious injuries.
3. Learned advocate for the appellant - claimant has
submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1360/2009 ORDER DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
properly calculating the amount of compensation. He has
submitted that amount of award is on lower side as the Tribunal
has not properly considered the various aspects; like pain, shock
and suffering, transportation, special diet, medical expenses etc.
He would further submit that the learned Tribunal has taken
Rs.1800/- as monthly income of the claimant. However, the
claimant was engaged in the business of milk and also doing
agricultural activities and for that 7/12 abstract has been
produced on record. He would further submit that though the
claimant has produced medical bills of Rs.92,781/-, the learned
Tribunal has erred in not considering the same on the ground
that the same are not exhibited.
3.1 He has submitted that the compensation is required
to be enhanced by modifying the award impugned accordingly
and this appeal may be allowed.
4. As the insurance company was not represented by
any advocate, on 14.10.2024, learned advocate Mr. Dakshesh
Mehta, who is panel advocate of National Insurance Company
Limited submitted that by next date, necessary arrangements
will be made to represent the insurance company. Today,
learned advocate Mr. Mehta submits that despite two emails
were sent, the insurance company did not turn up and thus,
none one represents the insurance company.
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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1360/2009 ORDER DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
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.
6.1 I have considered the submissions made by the rival
parties. I have perused the record and proceedings of the
Tribunal. I have gone through the impugned judgment and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1360/2009 ORDER DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
award passed by the learned Tribunal. From the record, it
transpires that the learned Tribunal erred in considering the
monthly income of the claimant and even has not added future
prospective. As per notification, the rate of minimum wage at
the time of the road accident for skilled labouer is Rs.2200/- and
therefore, the same is to be adopted. Even as per the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance
Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017 (16) SCC
680, since the claimant is aged 27 years at the time of road
accident, 40% rise towards loss of future prospect is to be given
and multiplier of 17 should be adopted.
6.2 From the medical certificate, the claimant is assessed with
functional disability of 50% considering the fact that both the
parties have accepted the same. The claimant is hospitalized for
more than six months and considering long inpatient period,
Rs.50,000/- is to be granted towards pain, shock and suffering
and Rs.25,000/- towards special diet and transportation.
Considering long inpatient period, actual loss of income is
granted equivalent to 12 months monthly income, which comes
to Rs.26,400/-.
6.3 The learned Tribunal has erred in not considering the
medical bills on the ground that it were not exhibited. However,
as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Vimladevi Vs. National Insurance Company Limited, 2019(2)
SCC 186, medical bills being original one worth Rs.92,781/- is
required to be computed and I round up the figure to Rs.1 lakh
towards medical expenses. Grant of attendant charge of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1360/2009 ORDER DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
Rs.5000/- is maintained.
6.3 Therefore, total compensation would be as under, which
the claimant/s is/are entitled to get.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future loss of income 3,14,160/-
(Rs.2200/-
x50% disability
= 1100 + 40% =
1540 x 12 x 17
Transportation 5,000/-
Pain, shock and suffering 50,000/-
Actual loss of income 26,400/-
Medical expenses 1,00,000/-
Special diet, transportation 25,000/-
Total... 5,20,560/-
Less : Amount which is already awarded 2,58,000/-
Additional amount which is awarded 2,62,560/-
7. Therefore, I hold that the claimant is entitled to get
the enhanced compensation of Rs.2,62,560/- with 9% 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.
8. For the reasons recorded above, the following order is
passed.
8.1 The present appeal is partly allowed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1360/2009 ORDER DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
8.2 The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
enhanced amount Rs.2,62,560/- with 9% 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.
8.3 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 claimants, by account payee
cheque / NEFT / RTGS, after proper verification and after
following due procedure.
8.4 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct
the courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
8.5 Record and proceedings be sent back to the
concerned Tribunal, forthwith.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
