Gujarat High Court
Legal Hiers Of Decd ... vs Vashrambhai Punjabhai Mundhava on 21 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3538/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3538 of 2011
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
LEGAL HIERS OF DECD BHARATBHAIJAYANTILAL MANDANI- NITABEN
& ORS.
Versus
VASHRAMBHAI PUNJABHAI MUNDHAVA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSHAD K PATEL(2844) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR KRUNAL R SAKSENA(5915) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 21/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal has been preferred against the
impugned judgment and award dated 01.08.2011 passed by
the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) & 6 th
Additional District Judge, at Rajkot, in M.A.C.P. No. 1597 of
2009, whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim
petition and awarded a sum of Rs.3,36,000/- (Rupees Three
Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Only) along with interest at the rate
of 6% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition
till its realization, as compensation.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3538/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
2. The succinct facts, which lead to the filing of the Claim
Petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988
are summarized as under:-
i. On 09.09.2009 at about 15:30 hours, Mr.
Bharatbhai Jayantilal Mandani (hereinafter
referred to as "the deceased") was riding
motorcycle bearing Registration No. GJ-3-BL-
4880, when it collided with another motorcycle
bearing Registration No. GJ-3-CF-6345, which
was coming from the opposite direction. In the
said vehicular accident, the deceased sustained
grevious injuries and subsequently succumbed
to them.
ii. It is also the case of the original
claimants/appellants herein that at the time of
the accident, the deceased was aged about 24
years and he was also married and was having
two sons aged about two years and two months
respectively.
iii. The Claim Petition was preferred under the
provisions of Section 163-A of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, therefore the issue of
negligence has no relevance.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3538/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
iv. Having considered the materials on record, te
learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim
petition and awarded a sum of Rs.3,36,000/-
(Rupees Three Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Only)
along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum,
from the date of filing of the claim petition till its
realization, as compensation. The learned
Tribunal also apportioned the liability for
satisfying the award in the ratio of 50:50,
between the original opponents Nos. 1 to 3 on
one hand and the original opponent No. 4 on the
other.
v. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
impugned judgment and award, the original
claimants/appellants herein, preferred the
present appeal on the ground of quantum.
3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
4. Mr. Harshad K. Patel, learned counsel for the
appellants/original claimants vehemently submitted that the
learned Tribuanal has determined the income of the deceased
at very lower side, which is much lesser than the minimum
wages prevalent at the relevant point of time. He contended
that the learned Tribunal could have considered the income of
the deceased atleast at Rs.40,000/- per annum, however, the
learned Tribunal has determined the annual income of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3538/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
deceased at Rs.19,200/-. He further submitted that the
learned Tribunal has not determined the compensation in
accordance to the 2nd Schedule of the Motor Vehicle Act,
1988, therefore, the compensation awarded by the learned
Tribunal is to be enhanced and judgment and award be
modified to the above extent.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Krunal R. Saksena, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 - IFFCO Tokyo
General Insurance Company vehemently submitted that there
is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and award and the
learned Tribunal has rightly considered the income of the
deceased, therefore, contended that the instant appeal
deserves to be dismissed.
6. Having considered the submissions of the learned
counsels for the parties and having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the present case, it is not in dispute that at
the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 24 years.
The learned Tribunal has considered the income of the
deceased at the time of accident in the absence of any
documentary evidence at Rs.2,400/-. At the relevant point of
time, the minimum wages for a skilled worker was Rs.3,860/-,
but considering the fact that the Claim Petition was filed
under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, the
annual income is restricted to Rs.40,000/- per annum. Thus,
considering the annual income of the deceased as Rs.40,000/-
at the time of the accident, and considering the multiplier of
"17" as per 2nd Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3538/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
total loss of dependency would come to the tune of
Rs.7,20,000/-. Further, as per 2 nd Schedule of the Act, 1/3rd of
the total loss of dependency is deducted on account of the
personal expenses of the deceased. Therefore, the net total
loss of dependency would come to Rs.4,80,000/- (i.e.,
Rs.7,20,000 - Rs.2,40,000 (1/3rd of 7,20,000)).
7. Original Claimants/appellants herein are also entitled to
a sum of Rs.2,000/- under the head of Funeral Expenses, a
sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head of loss of consortium and a
sum of Rs.2,500/- under the head of Loss of Estate.
8. Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the
appellants herein shall be entitled for the following
compensation:-
Sr. No. Head Amount in rupees
1 Loss of dependency 4,80,000/-
2 Funeral expenses. (+) 2,000/-
3 Loss of estate (+) 2,500/-
4 Loss of consortium (+) 5,000/-
5 Total Compensation 4,89,500/-
Compensation awarded by
6 the learned Tribunal vide the (-) 3,36,000/-
impugned judgment and
award dated 01.08.2011.
7 Enhanced amount of Rs.1,53,500/-
Compensation
9. Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the
appellants herein shall be entitled for an additional
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3538/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
compensation to the tune of Rs.1,53,500/- (Rupees One Lakh
Fifty Three Thousand Five Hundred Only). The learned
Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. The
said rate of interest is maintained; accordingly, the appellants
herein shall be entitled to 6% of interest per annum on the
additional amount of compensation.
10. The learned Tribunal has apportioned the liability
between and amongst the respondents. The said
apportionment has not been interfered with and is accordingly
maintained. Therefore, the respondents are directed to
deposit the additional amount of compensation along with
interest within a period of six weeks from today. Upon
depositing the said amount, learned Tribunal shall disburse
the entire awarded amount to the appellants herein (after
deducting deficit court fee, if any), after due verification.
11. Amount, if any, lying deposited with the Registry of this
Court shall be transmitted to the learned Tribunal concerned.
Records & Proceedings, if any be sent to the learned Tribunal
concerned. No order as to costs.
12. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of,
accordingly.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
ARUN
