PRAVINBHAI HIRABHAI DAMOR vs BABUBHAI RUPABHAI AMALIYAR
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4674 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
PRAVINBHAI HIRABHAI DAMOR & ANR.
Versus
BABUBHAI RUPABHAI AMALIYAR & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
Date : 05/11/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the present
appellants – original claimants, being aggrieved and
dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 30.04.2022
nd
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) & 2
Additional District Judge, Dahod in M.A.C.P. No.283 of 2015.
2. Since the factual aspects of the case involving the
Page 1 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
vehicle in the road accident and the liability of the owner as
well as the insurer are not in dispute by the Insurance
Company, to streamline the consideration of the present
appeal, I have adopted approach that avoids burdening the
judgment with unnecessary narration, since the facts are
already detailed in the record and there is no practical
purpose in restating the same. Likewise, re-evaluating the
underlying findings would serve no useful purpose in the
appeal. Thus, reiterating the settled matters would only
clutter the final judicial analysis. Therefore, this Court can
safely adopt the existing record without further review and
the omission ensures a focused, clear, and efficient resolution
of the remaining issue argued before the Court.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Nishit Bhalodi for the appellants –
original claimants submitted that the impugned judgment and
award has been challenged by preferring the present appeal
only on the ground that the minimum wage as per the
Minimum Wages Act has not been considered and the income
of the deceased has been assessed at Rs.1250/- per month by
the learned Tribunal, which is on a very lower side as the
accident took place in the year 2015 and at that time,
Page 2 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
minimum wage was prevailing at Rs.7,644/- per month. It is
further submitted that the age of the deceased being 17 years
is not in dispute. As per the averment made in the claim
petition that the deceased was doing work of animal
husbandry and was also studying. It is submitted that as per
the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi ,
reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 , as the age of the deceased
was below 40 years, 40% future prospective income is
required to be given. It is submitted that as the deceased was
unmarried person, ½ deduction is required to be given. It is
further submitted that the learned Tribunal has given
multiplier of 15 but, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & Ors. vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr. , reported in 2009 (6) SCC
121 , as the age of the deceased was 17 years, multiplier of 18
is required to be given and loss of estate and funeral expenses
is to be awarded at Rs.19,965/- respectively. Further, loss of
consortium is required to be awarded at Rs.53,240/- to each of
the two claimants. Thus, considering the present appeal is
required to be allowed.
4. Per contra, learned advocate Ms.Kirti Pathak for the
Page 3 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
respondent – insurance company has vehemently opposed the
present appeal and submitted that the impugned judgment
and award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and proper.
The learned Tribunal has rightly considered the income of the
deceased, age of the deceased, dependancy and future
prospective income. It is further submitted that under the
heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses, the learned
Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation and the
amount under the head of loss of consortium awarded by the
learned Tribunal is just and proper. It is, therefore, submitted
that no interference is called for in the impugned judgment
and award and the present appeal is required to be dismissed.
5. Apt to note that the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is a
beneficial piece of Legislation. The concept of just and fair
compensation is integral and seminal to the MV Act. The
compensation to be awarded under the principle of just and
fair compensation to the injured of the road accident or the
legal representative/s of the deceased person is based on the
principle of fairness, reasonableness and equability. Anguish
of the heart or for mental turbulence being consequential
result of the road accident cannot be actually compensated,
Page 4 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
but the quint essentiality lies in adopting holistic and
pragmatic view to the computation of the compensation for
the loss sustained, which is to be in the realm of realistic
approximation. Although exact or perfect arithmetical
calculation of compensation for reparation of the loss arrived
from the road accident is almost impossible. The Tribunal is
bestowed with duty to make an endevour to award just
compensation regardless of the amount claimed by the
claimants. The determination of the quantum of compensation
therefore, must be liberal and not niggardly since the law
values life and limb in a free country in generous scale.
Needless to state that money may be awarded, so that
something tangible may be procured to reach something else
of the like nature, which has been destroyed or lost, but
money cannot renew physical frame that has been battered
and shattered being a result of the road accident. Yet Tribunal
to endavour to bring back victim to stage of pre-road accident
as far as possible Thus, the award must be reasonable and
cannot be assessed with moderation though it cannot at the
same time be pity and what could be granted must be just,
fair and equitable compensation.
Page 5 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
6. I have considered the submissions made by the rival
parties, perused the Record & proceedings of the learned
Tribunal and also gone through the impugned judgment and
award passed by the learned Tribunal.
7. From the impugned judgment and award, it transpires
that the income of the deceased has been assessed by the
learned Tribunal is at Rs.1,250/- per month but, as the
accident took place in the month of July, 2015, the income of
the deceased is required to be assessed as per the Minimum
Wages Act and the minimum wage prevailing at the time of
accident was Rs.7,644/- per month and 40% future
prospective income is to be awarded. Further, as per the
judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay
Sethi (supra) , 40% future prospective income is required to
be given as the deceased was below the age of 40 years and
as he was unmarried, ½ deduction is required to be given as
personal expenses. Further, the learned Tribunal has applied
the multiplier of 15 but, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Supra) , for the age
from 15 to 20 years, multiplier of 18 is required to be given.
Further, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
Page 6 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) , the loss of estate and loss
of funeral expenses is required to be awarded and as per the
decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of United
India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder
Kaur , reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780, loss of consortium is
to be awarded to each of the two claimants.
8. Thus, the total compensation, which the claimants are
entitled to get, is as under:
Heads of Compensation Reassessed by this Court
Future Loss of Dependency Rs.11,55,816/-
Loss of Funeral Expenses Rs.19,965/-
Loss of Estate Rs.19,965/-
Loss of Consortium Rs.1,06,480/- (Rs.53,240/- x 2)
Total Compensation Rs.13,02,226/-
Less: Compensation already
Rs.2,95,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal
Additional Compensation Rs.10,07,226/-
9. Therefore, I hold that the claimants are entitled to get
enhanced compensation of Rs.10,07,226/- with interest at the
rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till
Page 7 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
its realization, which would meet the ends of justice.
10. For the reasons recorded above, the following order is
passed:-
a. The present appeal is partly allowed.
b. The insurance company is directed to deposit the
enhanced amount of Rs.10,07,226/- along with interest at the
rate of 9% p.a. before the concerned learned Tribunal from
the date of filing of the claim petition till realization, within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
order. The rest of the directions issued by the learned
Tribunal shall remain the same.
c. The learned Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded
amount, including the amount lying in FDR and/or with the
Tribunal, together with accrued interest, if any, to the
claimants by account-payee cheque or through NEFT / RTGS,
after proper verification and after following the prescribed
procedure..
d. While making the payment, the learned Tribunal shall
deduct the court fees, if any, remaining unpaid in accordance
Page 8 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026
C/FA/4674/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240378112023)
with the applicable rules/law.
e. Award be drawn accordingly.
f. Record & proceedings, if any, shall be sent back to the
concerned Tribunal forthwith.
(L. S. PIRZADA, J)
Hitesh
Page 9 of 9
Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Thu Nov 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 00:02:05 IST 2026