[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Kamlesh Vajesinh Meda vs Rakesh Jogadabhai Neenama on 23 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/372/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 372 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
KAMLESH VAJESINH MEDA
Versus
RAKESH JOGADABHAI NEENAMA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MASUMI V NANAVATY(9321) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 23/02/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and award
dated 10.11.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dahod,
(hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim
Petition No.444 /2015, the appellant -original claimant preferred present
appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter
referred to as "the Act" for short).
2. Heard Mr. Nishit Bhalodi, learned Advocate for the appellants -
original Claimants and Mr. Vibhuti Nanavaty, learned counsel for respondent
No.3. Though served, none appears for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
3. It is the case of the claimant that on 10.10.2015 at about 17:00 hours,
the claimant was driving his motorcycle bearing No.GJ-20-E-1970, at that
time, one Jeep bearing No.MP-45-BB-1108 came with full speed and in rash
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/372/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
and negligent manner, dashed with the motorcycle of the claimant. As a
result, the claimant received injuries. Police Complaint came to be filed by
the wife of the claimant at Limdi Police Station. Therefore, the claim
petition was filed by the claimant to get compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- from
the opponents. After appreciating the evidence produced on record, the
learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.4,25,540/- along with cost
and interest @ 7.5 % p.a.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal
has committed error in assessing income of the claimant as Rs.4500/- as he
was doing centering work and used to earn Rs.15,000/- p.m. Also, the
Tribunal has awarded meager amounts of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.7500/- under
the head of pain, shock and suffering and under the head of special diet and
attendant charges respectively. Hence, he has requested to enhance the
compensation amount in the appeal.
5. Learned Advocate Mr. Nanavaty for the Insurance Company has
opposed the present appeal on the ground that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is just, legal and proper and no interference is required to
call for. With these submissions he has requested to dismissed the appeal.
6. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Govind Yadav Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2012(1) TAC 1
(SC), that if no proof of income is produced on the record then Tribunal has
to consider prevalent minimum wages in absence of ample evidence of
monthly income of the applicant. In the present case, the accident occurred
in October 2015 and during that time, as per the Government approved
minimum wages was Rs.7,450/-, whereas, the Tribunal has assessed the
income of the claimant as Rs.4,500/- per month, which is required to be
enhanced and hence, the income of the injured is reassessed as Rs.7,450/-
per month.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/372/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
7. So far as disability is concerned, the appellant has produced a
disability certificate issued by Dr. Petrolwala at Exh:29. From the said
document, it appears that the appellant was admitted as an indoor patient
at Saifi Orthopedic Hospital at Dahod. As per the opinion of the doctor, the
disability of the body as a whole was assessed at 55.67%. However, both the
parties agreed to assess the disability at 23 % for the body as a whole and
pursis to that effect was produced at Exh:26. Therefore, the Tribunal has
rightly assessed the disability to the extent of 23%.
8. As the Tribunal has considered disability of the injured as 23% and
multiplier of 17 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] which are just and
proper. Now if we reassess the compensation with reassessed income of the
injured Rs.7450/- p.m income on adding future prospects income at 40 %,
then it would come to Rs.10,430/- p.m. So per annum income comes to
Rs.1,25,160/- and by applying 17 multiplier and deduction of 23 % disability,
it comes to Rs.4,89,376/- (1,25,160/- x 17 multiplier x 23 % disability) under
the head of future loss of income.
9. As the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.2,95,600/- towards future loss
of income, the appellant is entitled to get additional amount of
Rs.1,93,776/- under the head of future loss of income. So far other heads
are concerned, this Court deems fit not to interfere with the same.
10. As discussed above, the appellant is entitled to get compensation
computed as under:
Heads Awarded by Reassessed by this Court
Tribunal
Future loss of Rs.2,95,600/- Rs.4,89,376/-
income
Actual loss of Rs.9,000/- Rs.9,000/-
income
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/372/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
Transportation, Rs.7,500/- Rs.7,500/-
Special diet, and
attendant charges
Pain, Shock and Rs.10,000/- Rs.10,000/-
sufferings
Medical and Rs.1,03,440/- Rs.1,03,440/-
treatment expenses
Total Rs.4,25,540/- Rs.6,19,316/-
compensation
11. In view of above, as the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of
Rs.4,25,540/-, however, as discussed above the appellant would be entitled
to get additional amount of Rs.1,93,776/- with proportionate costs and
interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal.
12. Hence, present appeal is partly allowed. The judgment and award
dated 10.11.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dahod,
in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.444 /2015 stand modified to the
aforesaid extent. Rest of the judgment and award remains unaltered. The
respondent No.3 - Insurance Company shall deposit said additional amount
of Rs.1,93,776/- along with interest as awarded by the Tribunal, before the
Tribunal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this
order. Record and proceedings be remitted back to the concerned Tribunal
forthwith.
13. The Tribunal is directed to recover or deduct the deficit court fees on
enhanced amount and thereafter disburse the amount accordingly. Award
to be drawn accordingly.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
SUCHIT
