[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Binitadevi Jayprakash vs Devabhai Nanubhai Thakor on 23 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/360/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 360 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
============================================
BINITADEVI JAYPRAKASH & ORS.
Versus
DEVABHAI NANUBHAI THAKOR & ORS.
============================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 23/02/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award
dated 19.09.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Auxi.), Ankleshwar, Bharuch (which shall hereinafter
be referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident
Claim Petition No.09 of 2017, the appellants - original claimants
have preferred the present appeal under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (which shall hereinafter be referred to
as "the Act" for short).
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/360/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
2) Heard learned Advocate Mr. Hemanl Shah, for the appellants -
original Claimants. The respondents are duly served but
remained absent. Perused the original record and proceedings.
3) It is the case of the appellants that on 15.01.2017, the deceased
Jayprakash Ramashankar (who shall hereinafter be referred to
as "deceased" for short) was going on his bicycle and when he
reached at National Highway No.8 while he was crossing, the
opponent no.1 came with Tanker bearing Reg. No.GJ-12-AZ-
9210, in rash and negligent manner due to which the opponent
no.1 could not control the steering of the vehicle and dashed
with the bicycle from backside due to which the deceased
sustained serious accidental injuries and succumbed to it.
Therefore, the appellants had filed MAC Petition seeking
compensation, wherein, the learned Tribunal after appreciating
the evidence produced on record has partly allowed the claim
petition.
4) Learned Advocate for the appellants - claimants has submitted
that the learned Tribunal has committed error in considering the
income of the deceased instead of assessing the income from
salary slip. He has further submitted that the Tribunal erred in
awarding meagre amount under the conventional heads. Hence,
he has requested to allow the present appeal.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/360/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
5) As challenge is given only qua income and consortium hence the
appeal is required to be decided in narrow compass. The
appellants - claimants have stated that the deceased was
serving as an Assistant Fitter on contract labour in Technoment
Pvt L.td, at Reliance Industries Jamnagar, and was drawing
monthly salary of Rs.20,000/- and to prove the same they have
produced salary slip for the month of October 2016 and
November 2016 at Exhibit 50 which is admitted by the learned
Advocate for the insurer. Further, the appellants have also
produced bank statement of Central Bank of India at Exhibit 54,
which is also admitted by the learned Advocate for the insurer.
As per bank statement at Exhibit 54, Rs.14,496/- was credited in
the account of the deceased by Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. However,
the learned Tribunal has committed error in assuming that the
deceased may not get work or all 30 days in a month and
assessed Rs.12,000/- per month. Therefore, considering the last
salary of the deceased as Rs.14,496/- which is evident from the
Bank Statement at Exhibit 54, the income of the deceased is
reassessed as Rs.14,450/- per month. Further, as the deceased
was aged 39 years 10 months and 7 days i.e. below 40 years at
the time of accident on the basis of which the learned Tribunal
has considered future prospective income as 40% and as the
deceased has left behind 5 dependents 1/4 deduction towards
personal and living expenses of the deceased and multiplier of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/360/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
15 were considered by the learned Tribunal 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] and National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay
Sethi, reported in 2017 ACJ 2700, which are just and proper.
6) Therefore, recalculating the income of the deceased as
Rs.14,450/- and future prospect of 40% = Rs.5,780/- which
comes to Rs.20,230/- and 1/4 amount is required to be
deducted towards personal living expenses of the deceased
which comes to Rs.5,057/- and the net amount comes to
Rs.15,173/-. In view of above the amount under the head of
loss of dependency is required to be reassessed as Rs.15,173/-
x 12 x 15 = Rs.27,31,140/-. Therefore, the appellants are
entitled to get additional amount of Rs.4,63,140/- towards loss
of dependency.
7) Further, the learned Tribunal by relying on the judgment of
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi,
reported in 2017 ACJ 2700, has awarded total Rs.2,53,000/-
under the three conventional heads, however, this Court is of
the view that amount is required to be reassessed as
Rs.18,150/- towards loss of estate, Rs.18,150/- towards funeral
expenses. Therefore, the appellants - original claimants are
entitled for additional amount of Rs.3,300/- (i.e. Rs.18,150/- -
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/360/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
Rs.16,500/- = Rs.1,650/- towards loss of estate and
Rs.18,150/- - Rs.16,500/- = Rs.1,650/- towards funeral
expenses).
8) Further, in view of ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Nanu
Ram, reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 and Janabai Wd/o
Dinkarrao Ghorpade & Ors., Vs M/s ICICI Lambord
Insurance Company Ltd., reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC)
666, the learned Tribunal has committed error in awarding only
Rs.2,20,000/- towards loss of consortium, however, in view of
above judgments the appellants - original claimants being legal
heirs of the deceased they are entitled for Rs.48,400/- each
towards the head of loss of consortium. Therefore, the amount
towards loss of consortium is reassessed as Rs.2,42,000/- (i.e.
Rs.48,400/- X 5). Therefore, the appellants are entitled for
additional amount of Rs.22,000/- under the head of loss of
consortium.
9) As discussed above, the appellants - original claimants are
entitled to get compensation computed as under:
Heads Awarded by Reassessed by this Court
Tribunal
Loss of dependency Rs.22,68,000/- Rs.27,31,140/-
including additional
amount of Rs.4,63,140/-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/360/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
Loss of estate Rs.16,500/- Rs.18,150/-
including additional
amount of Rs.1,650/-
Funeral expenses Rs.16,500/- Rs.18,150/-
including additional
amount of Rs.1,650/-
Loss of consortium Rs.2,20,000/- Rs.2,42,000/-
including additional
amount of Rs.22,000/-
(Rs.48,400/- X 5)
Total compensation Rs.25,21,000/- Rs.30,09,440/-
including total additional
amount of Rs.4,88,440/-
10) In view of above, as the Tribunal has awarded total
compensation of Rs.25,21,000/-, however, as discussed above
the appellants are entitled to get additional amount of
Rs.4,88,440/- (Rs.30,09,440/- - Rs.25,21,000/-) with
proportionate costs and interest as awarded by the learned
Tribunal.
11) Hence, present appeal is partly allowed. The judgment and
award dated 19.09.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Ankleshwar, Bharuch, in MAC Petition
No.09 of 2017 stands modified to the aforesaid extent. Rest of
the judgment and award remains unaltered. The respondent
no.3 - Insurance Company shall deposit the said additional
amount of Rs.4,88,440/- along with interest as awarded by the
Tribunal, before the Tribunal within a period of four weeks from
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/360/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
the date of receipt of this order. Record and proceedings be
remitted back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
12) The learned Tribunal is directed to recover or deduct the deficit
court fees on enhanced amount and thereafter disburse the
amount accordingly.
13) Interim application, if any, also stands disposed of.
14) Award to be drawn accordingly.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
