Gujarat High Court
Videshbhai Somabhai Sangada vs Mayurkumar Dhusabhai Desai on 18 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1448/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1448 of 2023
==========================================================
VIDESHBHAI SOMABHAI SANGADA
Versus
MAYURKUMAR DHUSABHAI DESAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK P MEHTA(6943) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 18/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present appeal is filed by the original claimant under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, being aggrieved and
dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 30.07.2021 passed by
the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vadodara in M.A.C.P.
No.913 of 2012.
1.1 By the said impugned judgment and award, though, the Tribunal
has partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the present
appellant- original claimant under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988. However, the Tribunal has confined to the amount of
compensation to the tune of Rs.44,300/- only with interest at the rate
of 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition till its actual
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1448/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025
undefined
realization, to be realized from the original opponents- respondents
herein jointly and severally.
2. This Court, vide order dated 12.06.2023, had admitted the
appeal, noting the issue raised, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager,
National Insurance Company Limited and Another reported in 2014
14 SCC 396.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Nishit A. Bhalodi has appeared on behalf
of the appellant and learned advocate Mr. Hardik P. Mehta has
appeared on behalf of respondent no.3-Insurance Company.
4. Despite service of rule upon respondent nos. 1 and 2, they have
chosen not to appear and objected to present appeal. The appeal is
peremptorily taken up for final hearing in their absence.
5. Learned advocate on record for the appellant, at the outset, has
apprised this Court on limited issue involved, and has submitted that
the Tribunal committed error by partly allowing the claim petition by
awarding amount of Rs.44,300/- under the combined head of future
loss of income, pain shock and suffering and special diet
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1448/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025
undefined
transportation attendant charges. In support of his submissions,
learned advocate has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Mallikarjun (supra), to contend that in
case of minor claimant on the date of accident, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has awarded an amount of Rs.1 Lakh in cases where permanent
disability is assessed to the extent of 10%. He has further invited my
attention to the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal in this
regard, and has pointed out that indisputably, the original claimants
was aged about 14 years at the time of the accident and as per the
Disability Certificate produced on record at Exh.54, though the same
was assessed at 18% permanent disability, the same was treated as
9% of body as a whole, in view of the pursis filed at Exh.53. He has,
therefore, submitted that considering the fact that the deceased was
minor at the relevant point of time and the disability is assessed at the
rate of 9% of body as a whole, in view of the decision of the aforesaid
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal ought to have
awarded Rs.1 Lakh. He has, therefore, urged this Court to allow the
present appeal to the aforesaid extent.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Hardik P. Mehta appearing for the
respondent no.3-Insurance Company was unable to object the
aforesaid submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1448/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025
undefined
original claimant. However, he has submitted that, this Court may take
into consideration the amount awarded by the Tribunal to the tune of
Rs.44,300/-, and may pass appropriate orders for enhancement of
amount of compensation.
7. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned advocates for
the respective parties and having gone through the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mallikarjun (supra), at the
outset, it would be appropriate to reproduce the relevant
observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in that case, which reads
as under:
"12. Though it is difficult to have an accurate
assessment of the compensation in the case of
children suffering disability on account of a motor
vehicle accident, having regard to the relevant
factors, precedents and the approach of various High
Courts, we are of the view that the appropriate
compensation on all other heads in addition to the
actual expenditure for treatment, attendant, etc.,
should be, if the disability is above 10% and upto 30%
to the whole body, Rs.3 lakhs; upto 60%, Rs.4 lakhs;
upto 90%, Rs.5 lakhs and above 90%, it should be
Rs.6 lakhs. For permanent disability upto 10%, it
should be Re.1 lakh, unless there are exceptional
circumstances to take different yardstick. In the
instant case, the disability is to the tune of 18%.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1448/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025
undefined
Appellant had a longer period of hospitalization for
about two months causing also inconvenience and
loss of earning to the parents."
8. In light of the aforesaid decision and the indisputed facts as
highlighted by learned advocates for the respective parties, the
original claimant was aged 14 years at the time of the accident, which
has been proved by the claimant by producing on record the copy of
School Leaving Certificate produced on record at Exh.52, wherein the
date of birth of the claimant is recorded as 08.02.1998, whereas the
accident had taken place on 29.07.2012. Learned advocate for the
respondent has not disputed the aforesaid fact as recorded by the
Tribunal, neither any appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company
against the impugned judgment and award. As regards the permanent
partial disability of the claimant is concerned, as evident from the
findings and the reasons assigned by the Tribunal in the impugned
judgment and award, the pursis (at Exh.53) was submitted by the
claimant, wherein he has consented to consider permanent partial
disability as 9% of body as a whole.
9. Noticing the aforesaid indisputed facts in light of the legal
principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Mallikarjun (supra), the issue raised in the present appeal, as regards
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1448/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025
undefined
enhancement of total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.1
Lakh, deserves consideration.
10. Hence, the present First Appeal stands allowed. The impugned
judgment and award dated 30.07.2021 passed by the learned Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Vadodara in M.A.C.P. No.913 of 2012, is
hereby modified. The appellant-original claimant is held entitled to
total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 1 Lakh with interest
at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
petition till its actual realization.
11. As pointed out by learned advocate for the respondent-
Insurance Company, the amount of Rs.44,300/- as awarded by the
Tribunal, is required to be deducted from the aforesaid total amount
of Rs.1 Lakh, as awarded in the present appeal. Original opponents-
respondents herein are held jointly and severally liable to pay the
enhanced amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.55,700/-
(Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.44,300/-) with 9% interest per annum from the date
of filing of the claim petition till its actual realization.
12. The respondent no.3-Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the enhanced amount of compensation with proportionate cost and
interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1448/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025
undefined
copy of this order. On deposit of the aforesaid enhanced amount by
the respondent no.3-Insurance Company, the Tribunal is directed to
release and disburse the aforesaid amount in favour of the original
claimant, subject to due verification, strictly in accordance with the
guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard. While
making the payment, learned Tribunal/Court shall deduct the Court
Fees, if not paid, in accordance with prevailing Rule. Let the aforesaid
exercise be undertaken by the Tribunal within a period of two weeks
from the date of deposit of the award amount.
13. With these observations, present First Appeal stands disposed
of in aforesaid terms.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
SUYASH SRIVASTAVA,
