1. The captioned appeal has been preferred against the
impugned judgment and award dated 24.10.2016 passed by
the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) City Civil
Court at Ahmedabad in M.A.C.P. No. 74 of 2010, whereby the
learned Tribunal partly allowed the Claim Petition and
awarded a sum of Rs.3,79,600/- (Rupees Three Lakh Seventy
Nine Thousand Six Hundred Only) along with interest at the
rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim
petition till its realization, as compensation.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
2. The succinct facts, which led to the filing of the
captioned appeal are summarized as under:-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
Sr. No. Description of documents Exh. No.
Affidavit in examination-in-chief and
1 Cross-examination of the 40
Claimant/appellant herein.
4 Medical Bills. 38-46
vi. Having considered the oral as well as
documentary evidence on record, the learned
Tribunal partly allowed the Claim Petition and
awarded a sum of Rs.3,79,600/- (Rupees Three
Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Six Hundred Only)
along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum,
from the date of filing of the claim petition till its
realization, as compensation.
vii. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
impugned judgment and award, the original
Claimant/appellant herein has preferred the
present appeal on the ground of quantum.
3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
4. Ms. Maitri P. Patel, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the original claimant/appellant vehemently submitted that
at the time of the accident, the claimant/appellant herein was
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
aged about 21 years and was educated upto B.COM, and was
gainfully employed with a departmental clothing store. She
further submitted that in the vehicular accident, the claimant/
appellant herein sustained disability of 70% body as a whole
and the said disability came to be reduced to 40% body as a
whole, with the consent of parties. She further submitted that
the income of the claimant could not be proved on record,
therefore, the learned Tribunal could have considered the
minimum wages for a skilled worker prevalent at the relevant
point of time. She further contended that though the claimant
has sustained disability of 40% body as a whole (by consent),
the learned Tribunal has not considered the future prospects
of the claimant. She further submitted that the learned
Tribunal has awarded meagre amount of compensation under
the heads of Pain Shock & Suffering, though the original
claimant/appellant remained hospitalized for a long period of
time and underwent surgical operations for spinal cord and
other bodily injuries. She further contended that the learned
Tribunal has awarded meagre amounts of compensation under
the heads of Attendant charges, Special Diet and
Transportation & Actual Loss of Income. In support of her
contentions, learned counsel for the claimant/appellant relied
upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Pappu Deo Yadav v. Naresh Kumar and Ors. reported
in (2022) 13 SCC 790. Relying upon the ratio of aforesaid
judgment, learned counsel for the claimant/appellant
submitted that just compensation be awarded to the appellant
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
and the impugned judgment and award be modified to that
extent accordingly.
5. Per contra, Mr. Nilesh A. Pandya, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent No.3 - Insurance Company
vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded
just compensation under all the heads. He further submitted
that the learned Tribunal has rightly considered the income of
the claimant/appellant herein at the time of accident as
Rs.3,500/- per month in the absence of any proof, therefore,
there is no infirmity in determining the income of the
claimant/appellant. He further submitted that the learned
Tribunal has awarded reasonable amount of compensation
under the heads of Pain Shock and Sufferings, Medical Bills,
Attendant charges, Special Diet and Transportation & Actual
Loss of Income. Therefore, the instant appeal is devoid of any
merit and contended that the same deserves to be dismissed.
6. Having considered the submissions of the learned
counsels for the parties and having perused the material
available on record, it is to be noted that the manner of
happening of the accident, issue of negligence and age of the
claimant/appellant herein are not under dispute. The original
claimant/appellant herein has challenged the impugned
judgment and award on the ground of quantum. It is the case
of the claimant/appellant herein that at the time of the
accident, he was aged about 21 years and was educated upto
B.COM, and was gainfully employed with a departmental
clothing store. It is an undisputed fact that the income of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
appellant was not proved on record before the learned
Tribunal, however, the learned Tribunal has determined the
income of the appellant at Rs.3,500/- per month in the
absence of any proof of income. The learned Tribunal in the
absence of any proof of income, ought to have considered the
minimum wages notified by the State Government of Gujarat
for the relevant point of time. The accident in question
occurred on 17.10.2009. At the time of the vehicular accident,
the minimum wages notified by the State Government of
Gujarat for such a skilled worker was Rs.3,880/- per month.
Therefore, in the absence of any evidence of income, the
monthly income of the appellant is re-assessed as Rs.3,880/-
per month.
7. It is on record that as per the Disability Certificate
issued by Dr. Adithya Upadhyay, the claimant/appellant herein
sustained disability of 70% body as a whole, but with the
consent of the parties, the learned Tribunal had taken the said
disability as 40% body as a whole. The perusal of the
impugned judgment and award further transpires that the
learned Tribunal has not considered the future prospects of
the claimant. Thus, considering the ratio of the judgments
rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mohd.
Sabeer @ Shabir Hussain v. Regional Manager, U.P. State
Road Transport Corporation reported in [2022 SCC Online SC
1701], Sarla Verma and Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
reported in 2009 AIR (SC) 3104 and National Insurance
Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017 (16) SCC
680, 40% of the notional monthly income is added to the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
monthly income of the claimant on account of the future
prospects of the claimant. Therefore, after adding 40% of the
notional income to the monthly income of the
claimant/appellant herein, the monthly income of the
claimant/appellant herein would come to Rs.5,432/-
(Rs.3,880/- + 40% of Rs.3,880/-). Thus, the income of the
claimant/appellant herein is reassessed as Rs.5,432/- per
month.
8. It is on record that the learned Tribunal with the consent
of the parties had assessed the functional disability of the
claimant/appellant herein at 40% body as a whole. Therefore,
after applying the multiplier of "18" as per the age of the
claimant, the claimant/appellant herein shall be entitled for a
sum of Rs.4,69,325/- (i.e, Rs.5,432/- X 40% (functional
disability) X 12 X multiplier of "18") under the head of future
loss of income.
9. The learned Tribunal has awarded a meagre sum of
Rs.10,000/- under the head of Pain Shock and Sufferings. It is
proved on record that the claimant/appellant herein had
sustained multiple fractures and remained hospitalized for a
long period of time. Therefore, considering the nature of
injuries sustained and period of hospitalization, it would be
just and proper, if the compensation awarded under the head
of Pain Shock & Sufferings is enhanced in view of the
judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Mohd. Sabeer (supra). Accordingly, a compensation of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded under the head of Pain Shock &
Sufferings.
10. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.53,000/-
under the head of Medical Expenses. The same was awarded
by the learned Tribunal after considering the medical bills
produced on record, therefore, no interference is required
under this head. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by
the learned Tribunal under the head of Medical Expenses is
maintained.
11. The learned Tribunal has awarded a meagre amount of
Rs.10,000/- under the head of Attendant charges, Special Diet
and Transportation. It is on record that the claimant/appellant
herein had remained under treatment for a period of six
months. Therefore, considering the nature of injuries
sustained and period of medical treatment undergone by the
appellant, I am of the considered view that the compensation
awarded by the learned Tribunal under this head is required
to be enhanced. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by
the learned Tribunal under the head of Attendant charges,
Special Diet and Transportation is enhanced from Rs.10,000/-
to Rs.50,000/-.
12. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.21,000/-
for the Actual Loss of income for a period of six months. Now
this Court has re-assessed the monthly income of the
claimant/appellant at Rs.5,432/- per month, so after
considering the income as Rs.5,432/- per month, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
compensation awarded under the head of Actual Loss of
Income is enhanced from Rs.21,000/- to Rs.32,592/- (i.e.,
Rs.5,432/- X 6 months).
13. Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the original
claimant/appellant herein shall be entitled for the following
amount of compensation:-
Sr. No. Head Amount in rupees
1 Future Loss of Income. 4,69,325/-
2 Pain Shock & Sufferings. (+) 1,00,000/-
3 Actual Loss of Income. (+) 32,592/-
(for 6 months)
4 Attendant charges, Special (+) 50,000/-
Diet and Transportation.
5 Medical Expenses. (+) 53,000/-
6 Total Compensation 7,04,917/-
Compensation awarded by
7 the learned Tribunal vide the (-) 3,79,600/-
impugned judgment and
award dated 24.10.2016.
8 Enhanced amount of Rs.3,25,317/-
Compensation
14. Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the original
claimant/appellant herein shall be entitled for an additional
compensation to the tune of Rs.3,25,317/- (Rupees Three
Lakh Twenty-Five Thousand Three Hundred Seventeen Only).
The learned Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9%
per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till
realization. The said rate of interest is maintained;
accordingly, the original claimant/appellant herein shall be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1427/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
entitled to 9% of interest per annum on the additional amount
of compensation from the date of filing of the Claim Petition
till its realization.
15. In view of the above discussions, the impugned judgment
and award stands modified to the aforesaid extent and
accordingly, the captioned appeal stands partly allowed.
16. The respondent No.3 - Insurance Company shall deposit
the enhanced amount of compensation along with interest
within a period of six weeks from today. Upon depositing the
said amount, the learned Tribunal shall disburse the entire
awarded amount to the original claimant/appellant herein
(deducting deficit Court fee, if any), after due verification.
17. Amount, if any, lying deposited with the Registry of this
Court shall be transmitted to the learned Tribunal concerned
forthwith. Records & Proceedings, if any be sent to the
learned Tribunal concerned. No order as to costs.
18. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of,
accordingly.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
ARUN
