Gujarat High Court

Sanjivkumar Bhikhabhai Patel vs Safi Mohammad Ibrahim Vora on 19 November, 2025

                                                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




                            C/FA/1215/2009                                     JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

                                                                                                                  undefined




                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                             R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1215 of 2009


                      FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


                      HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI

                      ==========================================================

                                    Approved for Reporting                     Yes           No

                      ==========================================================
                                           SANJIVKUMAR BHIKHABHAI PATEL
                                                      Versus
                                         SAFI MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM VORA & ORS.
                      ==========================================================
                      Appearance:
                      MR.MRUDUL M BAROT(3750) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
                      MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Defendant(s) No. 4
                      RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
                      UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
                      ==========================================================

                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI

                                                         Date : 19/11/2025

                                                          ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned

judgment and award dated 11.12.2008 passed by the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), 1st Fast Track Court at Nadiad

in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.684 of 1997, whereby the

learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,49,500/- as a

compensation along with the interest at the rate of 9% per

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its

realization.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the present appeal is that

on 29.01.1997, the original claimant/appellant herein along with

his friend namely Kalpeshbhai was going to their house on

scooter, when they were proceeding on the road parallel to the

railway track between Mahemdabad and Ahmedabad, in the

meantime, the respondent No.1 came with his matador bearing

registration No.GJ-7-X-5938 in rash and negligent manner at an

excessive speed so as to endanger the human life and hit the

scooter. In the said accident, the appellant and his friend

sustained grievous injuries and he was taken to the hospital

where he remained admitted as an indoor patient for a long

period. It is also the case of the appellant that at the time of

accident the appellant was aged about the 23 year and he was

earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month from the work of

repairing the tractor, rickshaw and scooter etc. It is also the case

of the appellant that the appellant was qualified mechanic as he

completed his ITI and he was educated up to 12 th standard. It is

also the case of the appellant, in the said accident, the appellant

sustained the fracture in right leg and he has also sustained the

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

other injuries. Therefore, the appellant filed the claim petition

before the learned Tribunal for seeking the compensation of

Rs.10,00,000/-.

3. On being served with the notices of the claim petition, the

respondent No.2- United India Insurance Company Limited filed

the written statement at Exh-21 thereby denying all the

averments made in the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of

the claim petition. The respondent No.4- Insurance Company

had not filed any written statement.

4. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the learned

Tribunal framed the following issues at Exh-26.

"1. Whether the applicant proves that the applicant sustained injuries owing to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the respondent No.1 involved in the accident?

2. Whether the applicant is entitled for compensation? If yes, from whom and what amount?

3. What order and award?"

5. In order to prove his claim, the appellant had led following

oral as well as documentary evidences before the learned

Tribunal:-

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

Sr Particulars Exhibit No.

5. Sonography and X-ray dated 61 09.11.1998

8. 23 bills for treatment, bills of 64 Rs.59,116/- for medical treatment

12. Affidavit in examination-in-chief of 44 Doctor Yogesh Parikh

15. R. C. Book of Matador bearing 55 registration No.Gj-7-X-5938

16. School Leaving Certificate of 49 appellant

18. Experience Certificate as a motor 82 mechanic

6. The respondents have not led any evidences in support of

their defence.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

7. Having considered the material on record, the learned

Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,49,500/- as a

compensation along with the interest at the rate of 9% from the

date of filing of the claim petition till realization.

8. The learned Tribunal has also apportioned the liability

between the respondent no.2 and 4 in the ratio of 70:30.

9. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the quantum of

compensation, the appellant herein preferred the present appeal.

10. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

11. Mr. Mrudul M. Barot, learned advocate appearing on behalf

of the appellant, vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal

has considered the monthly income of Rs.2,000/- per month

ignoring the fact that the appellant is a qualified mechanic and

he was educated up to ITI and 12 th standard. He further

submitted that at the time of accident, the appellant was doing

his own mechanic work by opening a garage and he was earning

Rs.6,000/- per month. But all these facts were ignored and the

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

learned Tribunal determined the income at a very lower side at

Rs.2,000/- per month. He further submitted that at the time of

accident, the appellant was aged about 23 years old, therefore,

the learned Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier of 18

as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Sarla Varma & Ors Vs. Delhi Transport Corp. & Anr. reported

in 2009 (06) SCC 121. However, the learned Tribunal has

applied the multiplier of 16. Learned advocate for the appellant

further submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded a

meager amount under the head of actual loss of income, special

diet, attendant charges and transportation. He further submitted

that though the appellant sustained the fracture in the right leg

and right hand and the doctor certified that the appellant

sustained the disability of 48%, however, the learned Tribunal

has awarded a meager sum of Rs.7,500/- under the head of

pain, shock and sufferings. He further submitted that the

reasonable amount is required to be awarded in all the heads of

compensation, therefore, the award is required to be modified to

that extent.

12. Though the Rule has been duly served upon the

respondent No.1 and 2. Despite services neither the respondent

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

No.1 who is the driver cum owner of the vehicle nor the

respondent No.2- United India Insurance Company Limited

appeared before this Court.

13. Mr. Rituraj M. Meena, learned advocate appearing on

behalf of the respondent No.4- Insurance Company, vehemently

submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment

and award. However, he very fairly submitted that the learned

Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 16 in place of 18,

therefore, the impugned judgment and award may be modified to

that extent.

14. He further submitted that so far the compensation in other

heads are concerned, the learned Tribunal awarded the

reasonable amount of compensation in all the heads. Therefore,

the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.

15. Having considered the submissions of the learned

advocates for the parties and having gone through the records, it

is not in dispute that the appellant herein is qualified mechanic

as he has done course from ITI in motor mechanic. He is also

educated up to 12th standard and at the time of accident he was

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

working as a mechanic on his own garage. The appellant had

pleaded that he was earning Rs.6,000/- per month but the

appellant could not prove his income on record by leading the

documentary evidence. Therefore, the learned Tribunal

determined the income of the appellant as Rs.2,000/- per

month. The accident had occurred in the year 1997, at that

relevant point of time the Gujarat Government has notified the

minimum wages for the skilled worker as Rs.1,300/- per month.

The learned Tribunal has considered the income of the appellant

as Rs.2,000/- per month, therefore, in my considered view in

absence of proof of income, the learned Tribunal has not

committed any illegality in considering the income of the

appellant as Rs.2,000/- per month. The learned Tribunal

considered the functional disability of the appellant as 20% body

as a whole. The said disability has not been disputed by the

appellant. It is not in dispute that at the time of accident, the

appellant was aged about 23 years old, therefore, the learned

Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier of 18 but the

learned Tribunal in place of 18, had applied the multiplier of 16.

Therefore, the compensation awarded under the head of future

loss is required to be corrected and accordingly the appellant

shall be entitled for a sum of Rs.86,400/- (2000 x 20% x 12 x

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

18). The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.12,000/-

under the head of actual loss of income for the period of six

moths. The compensation awarded under this head requires no

consideration. The learned Tribunal has also awarded a sum of

Rs.61,000/- under the head of medical treatment. The appellant

has produced the bills of Rs.61,000/- for the treatment,

therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the

compensation of Rs.61,000/- under the head of medical

treatment. The learned Tribunal has awarded a meager sum of

Rs.5,000/- under the head of special diet, attendant charges and

transportation. In my considered view, the compensation

awarded under this head is at a very lower side, therefore, the

same is required to be enhanced to Rs.20,000/- and accordingly,

a sum of Rs.20,000/- is awarded under the head of special diet,

attendant charges and transportation. The learned Tribunal has

awarded a sum of Rs.7,500/- under the head of pain, shock and

suffering. It is on record that the appellant sustained the

fracture injuries of right hand and right leg, therefore, the

learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation at a very lower

side. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the

appellant and having regard to the percentage of disability

sustained by the appellant, a sum of Rs.25,000/- is awarded

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

under the head of pain, shock and suffering.

16. Thus, in view of the above discussions, the appellant shall

be entitled for the following compensation under the following

heads:-

                                                   Particulars                            Amount (Rs.)
                          Future Loss of Income                                                     86,400/-
                          Actual Loss of Income                                                     12,000/-
                          Medical treatment                                                         61,000/-
                          Transportation, Special Diet and Attendant                                20,000/-
                          Charges
                          Pain, Shock and Suffering                                                 25,000/-
                                                                                Total            2,04,400/-
                                       Less: compensation already awarded                        1,49,500/-
                                                                       Enhancement                  54,900/-

17. The learned Tribunal has already awarded a sum of

Rs.1,49,500/-. Therefore, the appellant shall be entitled for the

additional compensation of Rs.54,900/- i. e. (Rs.2,04,400/- -

(less) Rs.1,49,500/-). Learned Tribunal has awarded the interest

at the rate of 9% per annum, therefore, the appellant shall also

be entitled for the interest at the rate of 9% on the additional

amount of compensation.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1215/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/11/2025

undefined

18. The learned Tribunal has apportioned the liability of

respondent No.1 and 2 and respondent No.3 and 4 in the ratio of