MINAXIBEN WD/O JAMUBHAI GONIYABHAI GAMIT vs GOPALSINH ASUSINH GAMIT

Court
Gujarat High Court

C/FA/19/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/10/2026
(GJHC240414762015)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 19 of 2015
==========================================================
MINAXIBEN WD/O JAMUBHAI GONIYABHAI GAMIT & ORS.
Versus
GOPALSINH ASUSINH GAMIT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MS DIMPLE A THAKER(6838) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA

Date : 26/10/2026

JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
1. The fact that an accident occurred on 14.04.2011 between a
Maruti Alto car and a Bolero car is not in dispute. As a result of this
accident, the driver of the Maruti Alto car, Jamubhai Goniyabhai
Gamit was killed in the accident. This resulted in his wife and two
children filing a claim petition.
2. The Tribunal, on considering the evidence, came to the
conclusion that both Jamubhai Goniyabhai Gamit and the driver of
the Bolero car were both responsible for the accident and attributed
negligence in the ratio of 40:60. It thereafter assessed the monthly
income of Jamubhai at Rs. 31,390/-, and after making the
appropriate deductions and applying the appropriate multiplier and
also after adding future prospects, awarded a sum of rupees
27,62,760/-.
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by MR.MEHULKUMAR.B. DESAI(HCD0075) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 14:04:50 IST 2026

C/FA/19/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/10/2026
(GJHC240414762015)
3. Being aggrieved by this award, insofar as it related to the
attribution of 40% negligence on Jamubhai and also on the ground
that the compensation awarded was inadequate, the present appeal
has been filed.
4. Insofar as negligence is concerned, admittedly, the charge-sheet
was laid against the driver of the Bolero car. Furthermore, the driver
of this Bolero car was also not examined to establish there was any
negligence on the part of Jamubhai Goniyabhai Gamit. It is also to be
noticed here that the complaint lodged by the driver of the Bolero car
itself indicated that his Bolero car had suffered a puncture and
thereafter it went and collided with the Maruti Alto car. This assertion
in the complaint by itself indicates that the accident occurred due to
the puncture to the Bolero car and in light of these factors, the
attribution of negligence to the extent of 40% on Jamubhai by the
Tribunal was wholly improper. Consequently, we set aside the finding
of negligence attributed to Jamubhai Goniyabhai Gamit and hold that
the driver of the Bolero car was alone responsible for the accident.
5. As far as compensation is concerned, Jamubhai was working in
DGVCL as a Junior Assistant and was aged about 45 years. He was
drawing a salary of Rs. 32,930/- and if the income tax and
professional taxes are deducted, he would be drawing a sum of Rs.
31,390/- and the finding in this regard by the Tribunal cannot be
found fault with.
6. In the light of the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered
in National Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in
AIR 2017 SC 5157 , 30% future prospects will have to be added to
this monthly income and thereafter 1/3 will be deducted towards the
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by MR.MEHULKUMAR.B. DESAI(HCD0075) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 14:04:50 IST 2026

C/FA/19/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/10/2026
(GJHC240414762015)
personal expenses deceased, just towards loss of dependency, the
claimants would be entitled to sum of Rs. 45,69,000/-
7. In accordance with the judgment of Pranay Sethi (supra) read
with the dictum of Apex Court in Reena Vs. Managing Director,
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, reported at 2026
(0) AIJEL-SC 77486, the claimants would also be entitled for loss of
consortium and other non-pecuniary sums amounting to Rs.
1,56,000/- (52,000/- x 3) and further sum of Rs. 19,500/- each for
loss of estate and funeral expenses. Thus, in all, modification of the
award of the Tribunal, the following sums are awarded:
Income Rs.31,390/-
Prospective Income (30%) Rs. 9,417/-
Income after deduction (1/3) Rs. 27,200/-
(Rounded off)
Multiplier X 14
Future Loss of income Rs.45,69,000/-
Consortium Rs.1,56,000/-
Loss of Estate Rs.19,500/-
Funeral Rs.19,500/-
Total Rs. 47,64,600/-
Awarded by the Tribunal Rs. 27,62,760/-
Additional Compensation Rs. 20,01,840/-
8. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to receive interest at
the rate of 9% on the enhanced amount.
9. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part. R & P be sent
back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
10. The Respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the additional amount of compensation along with interest
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by MR.MEHULKUMAR.B. DESAI(HCD0075) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 14:04:50 IST 2026

C/FA/19/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/10/2026
(GJHC240414762015)
within a period of EIGHT WEEKS from the date of receipt of copy
of this judgment. Upon deposit of the amount the learned
Tribunal will disburse the same to the claimant by NEFT/RTGS
on proper verification.
(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA,J)
(J. L. ODEDRA, J)
Mehul Desai
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by MR.MEHULKUMAR.B. DESAI(HCD0075) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 14:04:50 IST 2026