Gujarat High Court
Dipeshkumar Yogeshchandra Shah vs Haydarbhai Gulambhai Pathan on 10 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/658/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 658 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
============================================
DIPESHKUMAR YOGESHCHANDRA SHAH
Versus
HAYDARBHAI GULAMBHAI PATHAN & ORS.
============================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 10/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award
dated 21.07.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Aux), Bharuch at Ankleshwar (hereinafter referred to
as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition
No.690 of 2013 (Old MAC Petition No.637 of 2010), the
appellant - original claimant preferred present appeal under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred
to as "the Act" for short).
2) Heard Mr. N. A. Bhalodi, learned Advocate for the appellant -
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/658/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/11/2025
undefined
original Claimant and Mr. H. G. Mazmudar, learned Advocate for
respondent - Insurance Company, whereas, the respondent
nos.1 and 2 remained absent. However, the matter is taken up
for hearing with consent. Perused the original record and
proceedings.
3) It is the case of the appellant - original claimant that on
12.05.2010, the appellant was driving his Travera Jeep bearing
Reg. No.GJ-16-AJ-3131, when he reached near Ranipura Patia in
Bharuch District, the respondent no.1 herein was driving Truck
bearing Reg. No.GJ-16-X-7840, at full speed in rash and
negligent manner and due to the rashness driving of the
respondent no.1 it was resulted into the accident. As a result of
which the appellant sustained grievous injuries. A complaint was
lodged with Jaghadiya Police Station for the offence punishable
under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the MV Act. Therefore, the
appellant has filed MAC Petition seeking compensation. After
appreciating the evidence produced on record the learned
Tribunal was pleased to partly allowed the claim petition.
4) The present appeal is filed on limited ground that future prospect
is not awarded hence the appeal is required to be decided in
narrow compass. Going through the impugned award passed by
the learned Tribunal it appears that the Tribunal has considered
the income of the claimant at Rs.6,000/- per month but has not
considered future prospect due to which loss is suffered by the
appellant. Further, the age group of the appellant is 50 years
and disability is agreed to 35% but under the head of pain,
shock and suffering awarded only Rs.25,000/- is very low
amount.
5) The learned Tribunal has not awarded or considered the aspect
of future prospect in view of National Insurance Company
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/658/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/11/2025
undefined
Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in 2017 ACJ 2700. for which
appellant is entitled to get compensation.
6) As per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla
Verma (Smt) & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &
Anr. [2009 (6) SCC 121], the Tribunal has considered
multiplier of 14 without considering future prospect and awarded
Rs.3,52,800/- under the head of future loss of amenities which
is required to be enhanced in view of Pranay Sethi (supra), by
25%, therefore, the income would be (Rs.6000 x
25%=Rs.1500/-) Rs.7,500/- after the calculation of the future
rise. Now total income under the head of future loss of income is
required to be considered as Rs.7,500/- x 12 x 35% x 14 / 100
= Rs.4,41,000/-. The learned Tribunal has awarded
Rs.3,52,800/- under the head of future loss of amenities,
however, the same is required to be considered as
Rs.4,41,000/-, therefore, the appellant is entitled to get
additional amount of Rs.88,200/- under the head of future loss
of income.
Further, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/-
under the head of pain, shock and suffering, however,
considering the disability of the appellant i.e. 35%, the appellant
is entitled to get additional amount of Rs.25,000/- under the
head of pain, shock and suffering.
7) As the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of
Rs.4,72,500/-, and deducted 10% contributory negligence which
comes to Rs.4,25,250/-, hence, as discussed above the
appellant would be entitled to get additional amount of
Rs.1,01,880/- (i.e. Rs.88,200 under the head of future loss of
income plus Rs.25,000/- under the head of pain, shock and
suffering and deducting 10% contributory negligence) with
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/658/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/11/2025
undefined
proportionate costs and interest as awarded by the learned
Tribunal.
8) The learned Tribunal has not committed any error in deducting
contributory negligence of 10% and not disturbed other findings.
So far the delay of 768 days caused in filing the present appeal
is concerned, pursuant to the order dated 11.02.2025 of co-
ordinate bench the appellant is not entitled to claim interest on
the said enhanced amount for the period of 768 days.
9) Hence, present appeal is partly allowed. The judgment and
award dated 21.07.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (Aux), Bharuch at Ankleshwar, in MAC Petition
No.690 of 2013 (Old MAC Petition No.637 of 2010) stands
modified to the aforesaid extent. Rest of the judgment and
award remains unaltered. It is provided that respondent No.3 -
Insurance Company shall deposit said additional amount of
Rs.1,01,880/- along with interest as awarded by the Tribunal,
before the Tribunal within a period of four weeks from the date
of receipt of this order. Record and proceedings be remitted
back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
10) The learned Tribunal is directed to recover or deduct the deficit
court fees on enhanced amount and thereafter disburse the
amount accordingly.
11) Award to be drawn accordingly.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
