[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Majulaben Suryakant Patel vs Himmatlal Kanubhai Kchchhi on 5 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2861 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
MAJULABEN SURYAKANT PATEL
Versus
HIMMATLAL KANUBHAI KCHCHHI & ORS.
Appearance:
MR DN PANDYA(545) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR NIKUNT K RAVAL(5558) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR NK MAJMUDAR(430) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 05/02/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal has been preferred against the
impugned judgment and award dated 02.05.2012 passed by
the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Narmada
at Rajpipla, in M.A.C.P. No. 164 of 2011, whereby the learned
Tribunal had partly allowed the Claim Petition and awarded a
sum of Rs.36,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Thousand 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.
2. The succinct facts, which led to the filing of the
captioned appeal, as narrated in the Claim Petition are
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
summarized as under:-
i. On 26.01.2011 at about 3:30 p.m., the original
claimant/appellant herein was travelling in a
Honda Active bearing registration No.GJ-6-DC-
1370, as a pillion rider. The said motorcycle was
being driven by the husband of the original
claimant/appellant herein, at a very moderate
speed and on the correct side of the road. When
they were passing through the Raopura Police
Parade Ground, the original opponent
No.1/respondent No.1 herein, came by driving a
motorcycle bearing registration No.GJ-6-CQ-2009,
at very excessive speed and in a rash and
negligent manner, and dashed with the Honda
Activa motorcycle on which the original claimant/
appellant herein was travelling from behind,
thereby causing the accident. As a result of the
said vehicular accident, the original
claimant/appellant herein sustained grievous
bodily injuries and she was taken to SSG Hospital
Vadodara for treatment.
ii. It is the case of the original claimant/appellant
herein before the learned Tribunal that she was
aged about 54 years and she was earning
Rs.3,000/- per month, by doing stitching work and
in addition to this, she was also rendering
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
gratuitous service as a homemaker. Therefore,
the Original Claimant/appellant preferred the
Claim Petition before the learned Tribunal
seeking compensation to the tune of
Rs.15,00,000/-.
iii. Having been served with the notices/summons of
the Claim Petition, original opponent
No.1/respondent No.1 herein - driver cum owner
of the offending motorcycle had chosen not to
appear before the learned Tribunal, while, the
original opponent No.2/respondent No.2 herein -
Insurer of the offending motorcycle filed its
Written Statement at Exh.17, thereby denying the
averments made in the Claim Petition in toto, and
in brief, prayed for dismissal of the Claim Petition.
iv. Having considered the pleadings of the parties
and the material available on record, the learned
Tribunal framed the following issues, for
determination:-
i. Whether the applicant prove that she
received injuries due to rash and negligent
driving of the driver of the vehicle involved
in the accident?
ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get
compensation ? If yes, what amount ?
iii. What award and against whom ?
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
v. Having considered the pleadings, evidence on
record and the submissions advanced by the
learned counsels for the respective parties, the
learned Tribunal partly allowed the Claim Petition
and awarded a sum of Rs.36,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Six Thousand 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,
and held the original opponent
Nos.1&2/respondent Nos.1&2 herein - driver cum
owner and Insurer of the offending vehicle, jointly
and severally liable to pay the awarded amount of
compensation to the original claimant/appellant
herein.
vi. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
impugned judgment and award, the original
claimant/appellant herein has challenged the
impugned judgment and award on the ground of
meagreness of compensation awarded by the
learned Tribunal.
3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
4. Mr. D. N. Pandya, learned advocate appearing on behalf
of the original claimant/appellant herein vehemently
submitted that at the time of the accident, the
claimant/appellant herein was doing stitching work, thereby
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
earning Rs.3,000/- per month. He further submitted that apart
from the stitching work, the original claimant/appellant
herein was also rendering gratitious service as a homemaker,
however, the learned Tribunal had not considered the
gratuitous service rendered by the original claimant/appellant
herein to her family and determined the income of the original
claimant/appellant herein at a very lower side. He further
submitted that the income of the claimant/appellant herein
could not be proved on record by leading any cogent evidence.
He further submitted that in the absence of any cogent
evidence on record, the learned Tribunal could have
considered the nature of work as well as gratuitous service
rendered by the claimant, and considered the minimum wages
prevalent at the time of the accident. He further submitted
that though the doctor has issued the Disability Certificate
vide which the permanent disability of the claimant was
determined as 10% body as whole, however, the learned
Tribunal had ascertained the disability of the claimant at 5%
body as whole. He further submitted that it is not in dispute
that at the of the time of the accident, the claimant was aged
about 54 years, however, the learned Tribunal had applied the
multiplier of "10" in place of "11". He further submitted that
the learned Tribunal had awarded meagre amount of
compensation under the heads of Transportation & special
diet, Actual loss of income and Pain, shock & suffering. He
further submitted that the learned Tribunal had not awarded
any amount of compensation under the head of medical
expenses, though the original claimant/appellant has incurred
expenses of more than Rupees One Lakh and has produced
medical bills at Exh.36 and Exh.51 worth Rs.24,310/-. He
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
further submitted that the impugned judgment and award be
modified accordingly.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Palak H. Thakkar, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2-
Insurance Company of the offending vehicle, vehemently
submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment
and award, as such, the captioned appeal is liable 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 there is no dispute
regarding the manner of occurrence of accident and the
negligence of respondent No.1 herein. The original
claimant/appellant herein has challenged the impugned
judgment and award on the ground of quantum.
7. So far as the quantum awarded by the learned Tribunal is
concerned, it is not in dispute that at the time of the accident,
the claimant was working as a tailor, doing the work of stitching.
Apart from that job, she was also rendering her service as a
homemaker. Therefore, in my considered view, in the absence of
evidence of income, the learned Tribunal could have considered
the minimum wages prevalent at the time of accident. The
accident in question occurred on 26.01.2011. At the time of the
vehicular accident, the minimum wages notified by the State
Government of Gujarat for such a skilled worker was
Rs.4,370/- per month. Therefore, in the absence of any
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
evidence of income, the notional monthly income of the
original claimant/appellant herein is reassessed as Rs.4,370/-
per month.
8. It is not in dispute that at the time of the accident, the
original claimant/appellant herein was aged above 54 years,
therefore, the notional monthly income of the original
claimant/appellant herein is to be enhanced by 10% on
account of the Future prospects of the original
claimant/appellant herein. Therefore, after adding 10% of the
notional income to the monthly income of the original
claimant/appellant herein, the monthly income of the original
claimant/appellant herein would come to Rs.4,807/- (i.e,
Rs.4,370/- plus 10% of Rs.4,370/-).
9. Perusal of the Disability Certificate proved at Exh.20
transpires that the claimant/appellant has sustained fractures
to her hip and ribs. The doctor has certified that the original
claimant has sustained permanent disability to the extent of
10%. Thus, considering the functional disability of the original
claimant/appellant herein at 10%, and applying the multiplier
of "11" as per age of the claimant/appellant herein, the
original claimant/appellant herein shall be entitled for a sum
of Rs.63,452/- (i.e, Rs.4,807/- X 10% Disability X 12 months X
multiplier of "11") under the head of Future Loss of income.
10. The learned Tribunal had awarded a meagre amount of
Rs.5,000/- under the head of Transportation & special diet.
Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the original
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
claimant/appellant herein in the vehicular accident and period
of hospitalization undergone, the compensation awarded
under the head of Transportation, special diet & attendant
charges is enhanced to Rs.15,000/-
11. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/-
under the head of Actual loss of income. Considering the
nature of injuries sustained by the claimant at the time of
accident, In my considered opinion, Actual loss of income is
required to be granted for a period of two months.
Accordingly, a sum of Rs.8,740/- (i.e., Rs.4,370/- X 2 months)
is awarded under the head of Actual loss of income.
12. Perusal of the impugned judgment and award further
transpires that the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.10,000/- under the head of Pain, shock & suffering.
Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the
claimant/appellant herein, the period of hospitalization and
medical treatment undergone, the compensation awarded
under the head of Pain, shock & suffering is enhanced to
Rs.15,000/-.
13. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any compensation
under the head of Medical treatment. Perusal of the records
transpires that the original claimant/appellant herein has
proved the medical bills at Exhs. 36 & 51 worth Rs.24,310.
Considering the evidence on record, a sum of Rs.25,000/- is
awarded under the head of Medical expenses.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
14. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, the original
claimant/appellant shall be entitled for the following amount
of compensation:-
Sr. Head Amount in rupees.
No.
1 Future Loss of income. 63,452/-
2 Transportation, special (+) 15,000/-
diet & attendant charges.
3 Actual loss of income. (+) 8,740/-
(for two months).
4 Pain, shock & sufferings. (+) 15,000/-
5 Medical expenses. (+) 25,000/-
6 Total Compensation 1,27,192/-
Compensation awarded by
7 the learned Tribunal vide (-) 36,000/-
its impugned judgment and
award.
8 Enhanced amount of 91,192/-
Compensation
15. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, the original
claimant shall be entitled for an additional compensation to
the tune of Rs.91,192/- (Rupees Ninety One Thousand One
Hundred Ninety Two 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 herein shall be
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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2861/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026
undefined
16. Thus, in view of the above discussion, the impugned
judgment and award stands modified to the aforesaid extent
and the captioned appeal preferred by the original claimant
stands partly allowed.
17. Respondent No.2 - 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 (deducting deficit
Court fee, if any), after due verification
18. Statutory 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.
19. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of,
accordingly.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
ARUN.
