Gujarat High Court
Virbai Aatmaram Alias Aatu Maheshwari vs Ranabhai Devabhai Rabari on 9 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/140/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 140 of 2022
==========================================================
VIRBAI AATMARAM ALIAS AATU MAHESHWARI & ORS.
Versus
RANABHAI DEVABHAI RABARI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR YOGI K GADHIA(5913) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 09/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hiren M Modi for the appellants
and learned advocate Mr. Yogi K Gadhia for respondent no.3 -
Insurance Company. Though Rule has been issued by this Court
upon respondents nos. 1 and 2 await service, however, looking to
the limited controversy involved the appeal is taken up for hearing
in their absence.
2. The present appeal has been preferred under the provisions
of 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'), at the
instance of the original claimant being aggrieved and dissatisfied
by the judgment and award dated 29.11.2018, passed by the Motor
Accident Claim Tribunal Kachchh at Bhuj vide MACP No. 506 of
2011. By the said judgment and award the Tribunal has partly
allowed the claim petition of the original claimant under Section
166 of the Act, holding the original claimant to entitled to recover
the compensation amount of Rs. 5,10,000/- against the claim of
Rs. 30,00,000/-. The original opponents being respondents nos. 1 to
3 herein are jointly and severally liable to pay the aforesaid amount
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/140/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
of compensation with proposed cost at the rate of 9% from the date
of claim petition till the actual realization.
3. This Court considering the submissions made by learned
advocate for the appellant and noticing the grounds raised in the
appeal memo, it appears that the appeal was admitted on
20.01.2022.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant at the outset has
submitted that the original claimants are seeking enhancement of
the amount of compensation mainly on two grounds. The attention
of this Court was drawn to the issue of entitlement of
compensation. It was submitted that the Tribunal has committed
grave error and ignored the prescribed wages notified by the State
Government at the time of accident. While referring to the schedule
of minimum wages, the learned advocate has pointed out that
considering the fact that the deceased was engaged as construction
worker, the tribunal ought to have considered the amount of
Rs. 4,607/-, as the income of the deceased at the time of accident.
Learned advocate for the appellant has further submitted that
accordingly, the future prospective income of the deceased is
required to be enhanced. The income of the deceased accordingly,
would stand enhanced from Rs. 36,000 to Rs. 56,400/-. Learned
advocate has not disputed the multiplier 13 being adopted in the
facts of the case considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. It is further
submitted that considering the age of the deceased, which falls
between 40 to 50 years. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680), the determination
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/140/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
of the income is required to be increased by considering 25% of
actual income. He has therefore urged that the future prospective
income of the deceased be raised to Rs. 6,11,000 instead of
Rs. 3,90,000/-.
4.1 Secondly, learned advocate for the appellant has urged this
Court to enhanced amount of compensation towards loss of
consortium. Attention of this Court was invited to the fact that the
decease was survived by aged mother, widow and his son. He has
therefore submitted that in view of the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co.
Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, each of the
claimants would be entitled for an amount of Rs. 48,400/-. He has
therefore urged this Court to reconsider the compensation awarded
towards loss of consortium to the tune of Rs. 1,45,200/-.
4.2 In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Pranay Sethi (supra), learned advocate has urged to
reconsider the amount awarded under conventional heads. He has
therefore prayed for enhancement of total amount of compensation
from 5,10,000/- to Rs. 8,42,500/-. Lastly, learned advocate has also
prayed for interest on the enhanced amount from the date of filing
of claim petition till its actual realization.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Gadhia appearing for respondent
insurance Company has though objected to the aforesaid
submissions by placing heavy reliance upon the findings and
reasons assigned by the tribunal. However, he is unable to dispute
the legal position as relied upon by the learned advocate appearing
for the appellant original claimants in the facts of present case. He
has therefore urged this Court to pass appropriate order.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/140/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions appearing for the
respective parties and having perused the findings and reasons
assigned by the Tribunal in light of the legal position as relied
upon, this Court is inclined to accept the submissions made by
learned advocate for the appellant.
6.1 In absence of any appeal being filed by respondent no.3
Insurance Company, the findings and reasons assigned by the
learned tribunal on the facts of the case, more particularly, the
issue of the negligence and the involvement of the vehicle has
attained finality. As regards the relevant factors to be considered
for the purpose of determining the future loss of income is
concerned, the age of the deceased is uncontroverted.
6.2 As regards the issue of income of the deceased is concerned,
on bare perusal of the minimum wages prescribed by the State
Government prevailing at the relevant point of time, this Court is
inclined to accept the submission of learned advocate for the
appellant to consider the income of the deceased which is raised to
Rs. 4,700/- per month. The annual income of deceased is thus
assessed as Rs. 56,400/- (Rs.4700 X 12). Considering 25% future
rise, the prospective income of deceased is assessed as (Rs. 56,400
X 25% = Rs. 14,100) Rs.14,100 + Rs.56,400 = Rs. 70,500/-. Since
the deceased was survived by aged mother, widow and their minor
son, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
Sarla Verma (supra), 1/3 deduction is required to be applied
towards personal and living expenses of deceased. Thus, applying
multiplier of 13, the dependency loss is determined as
Rs.6,11,000/-. Having held so, the future prospective income of the
deceased is required to be enhanced from Rs.3,90,000/- to
Rs.6,11,000/-.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/140/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
6.3 As regards submissions made by learned advocate for loss
of consortium is concerned, in view of the settled legal position as
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma
Gen. (supra) as well as noticing the fact that the deceased was
survived by the aged mother, widow and his only son, the
respective claimants are entitled to the compensation towards
parental, spousal and filial consortium. Thus, each of the claimants
are held entitled to amount of Rs. 48,400/- towards loss of
consortium.
6.4 There is no challenge being made with regard to the amount
of compensation being awarded towards medical expenses. Hence,
the award of compensation awarded by the tribunal under the head
of medical expenses is hereby confirmed.
6.5 This brings to the last submission of learned advocate for the
appellant with regard to the amount of compensation claim towards
loss of estate and funeral expenses is concerned, in light of the
decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi
(supra), this Court, is inclined to accept the aforesaid submission
of learned advocate for the appellant original claimant. The amount
of Rs. 15,000/- each awarded towards the head of loss of estate and
funeral expenses is reconsidered and is enhanced to Rs. 18,150/-
each.
For the foregoing reasons, the total amount of compensation
is enhanced from Rs.5,10,000/- to Rs. 8,42,500/-.
7. The amount of compensation under each of these heads, is
reproduced in tabular form as under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/140/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
SR Compensation As per impugned Award As per submission
No. of claimant
1 Dependancy Loss
INCOME Rs.4700/- X 12
Rs.3000/- X 12 = Rs. = Rs. 56,400/-
36000/-
Prospective income Rs.9000/- Rs.14,100/-
25%
TOTAL Rs.45,000/- Rs.70,500/-
Deduction of 1/3 Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 23,500/-
towards personal
expenses
TOTAL Rs.30,000/- Rs.47,000/-
TOTAL Rs. 3,90,000/- Rs. 6,11,000/-
2 Loss of Consortium
Spouse Rs.40,000/- Rs.48,000/-
Filial Rs.48,000/-
Parental Rs.48,000/-
3. Medical Expenses Rs.50,000/- Rs.50,000/-
4. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/- Rs.18,150/-
5. Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000/- Rs.18,150/-
GRAND TOTAL Rs. 5,10,000/- Rs.8,42,500/-
AWARDED AMOUNT = Rs.5,10,000/-
ENHANCED AMOUNT = Rs.3,32,500/-
7.1 For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The present
appellant- original claimants are held entitled to total amount of
compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,42,500/-. Since, the Tribunal has
awarded compensation of Rs. 5,10,000/-, the appellants are held
entitled to enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 3,32,500/- (Rs.
8,42,500 - Rs. 5,10,000).
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/140/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
8. The aforesaid enhanced amount is awarded with
proportionate costs and interest at the rate of 9% per annum as
awarded by the Tribunal which shall be recoverable from the
respondents herein jointly and severally. The respondents are
therefore directed to deposit the aforesaid enhanced amount of
compensation within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of this order. Upon deposit of the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal is
directed to released and disburse the entire award amount in
favour of the respective claimants which shall be apportioned in
terms of the directions of the Tribunal, as recorded in the
impugned judgment and award. It is further directed that the
Tribunal shall strictly adhere to the guidelines of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in this regard. The aforesaid exercise is directed to be
completed within a period of two weeks from the date of deposit of
the award amount.
With these observations the first appeal stands disposed of.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
Radhika
