HEIRS OF DECD. DHIRAJBHAI @ DHIRUBHAI KANJIBHAI vs MANOJBHAI CHIMANLAL THAKKER
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 848 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
HEIRS OF DECD. DHIRAJBHAI @ DHIRUBHAI KANJIBHAI & ORS.
Versus
MANOJBHAI CHIMANLAL THAKKER & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS AMRITA AJMERA(5204) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 27/08/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned
judgment and award dated 06.07.2012 passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), at Surendranagar in Motor
Accident Claim Petition No.131 of 2005, whereby the learned
Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a
sum of Rs.4,64,100/- as compensation along with interest at the
rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition
till its realization.
2. The succinct facts which led to the filing of the captioned
appeal are that on 31.10.2004, at about 11:00 a.m., the
deceased- Dhirajbhai @ Dhirubhai Kanjibhai was driving his
Motorcycle on the left side of the road at a moderate speed and
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
was going to Tikar. When he reached at the place of the accident,
the original opponent No.1 came by driving his Motorcycle
bearing registration No.GJ-13-H-8764 in a rash and negligent
manner so as to endanger human life and dashed into the
motorcycle of the deceased. As a result of the accident, the
deceased sustained grievous injuries and thereafter succumbed
to the same.
2.1. Having been served with the notice of the claim petition,
the opponent No.2- Insurance Company appeared and filed
Written Statement, thereby denying the averments made in the
claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
2.2. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, oral as well
as documentary evidence on record and the submissions
canvassed by learned advocates for the parties, the learned
Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.4,64,100/- as compensation
along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of
filing of the claim petition till its realization.
2.3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and award, the appellants herein preferred the
captioned appeal on the ground of quantum.
3. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
4. Ms. Amrita Ajmera, learned advocate appearing on behalf
of the original claimants/appellants herein vehemently
submitted that at the time of the accident, the deceased was
aged about 35 years and he was an ex-armyman. It is submitted
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
that he was a qualified driver and also engaged in agricultural
work. However, the learned Tribunal had assessed the income of
the deceased at a lower side. It is submitted that while assessing
the monthly income of the deceased, the learned Tribunal ought
to have considered the oral as well as documentary evidence
available on record, and ought to have assessed the income of
the deceased at a higher side. It is submitted that in the case of
Minu Rout & Anr. Vs. Satya Pradyumna Mohapatra & Ors. ,
reported in 2013 (10) SCC 695 , the Hon’ble Apex Court
assessed the monthly income of the driver at Rs.6,000/-.
4.1. Learned advocate for the appellants further submitted that
at the time of the accident, the deceased was survived by six
legal representatives. However, the learned Tribunal had
rd th
deducted 1/3 of the monthly income instead of 1/4 on
account of personal expenses of the deceased. It is submitted
that the learned Tribunal ought to have applied a multiplier of
16 as per the age of the deceased. In support of her contention,
she placed reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi
Transport Corp. & Anr. , reported in 2009 (06) SCC 121 .
4.2. Learned advocate for the appellants further submitted that
the learned Tribunal awarded a meager amount of compensation
under conventional heads, therefore, she prayed for
enhancement of compensation under these heads. In support of
her contention, she placed reliance upon the judgments
rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. , reported in
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
(2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors. , reported in
2018 (18) SCC 130 .
5. Per Contra , Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned advocate
appearing on behalf of respondent No.2- Insurance Company,
vehemently submitted that the income was not proved on record
by leading cogent evidence. Therefore, the learned Tribunal had
rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,975/- per
month. It is submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned
judgment and award, therefore, the captioned appeal is liable to
be dismissed.
6. Having considered the submissions canvassed by the
learned advocates for the parties and having gone through the
record, it is to be noted that the appellants have challenged the
impugned judgment and award on the ground of quantum.
7. So far as quantum is concerned, the learned Tribunal had
assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,975/- per month. It
emerges from the record that the deceased was an ex-armyman
aged about 35 years. It also emerges from the record that the
claimants/appellants have proved the certificate at Exhibit-42.
The said certificate would show that the deceased was a qualified
driver and he also served as a driver in the Army Medical Corps.
It also emerges from the record that the Armed Forces Servies
issued a graduation certificate, which would show that the
deceased was a graduate. Further, Exhibit-54 would show that
the widow, after the demise of her husband, is getting a pension
of Rs.1,591/-. The extract of revenue record at Exhibit-55 would
Page 4 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
further show that the land comprised in Khata No.124 stands in
the name of the father of the deceased. It is the case of the
claimants/appellants that the deceased was working as a driver
at the time of accident and he had also appeared in competitive
examinations conducted by Gujarat Subordinate Service
Selection Board (GSSSB). Having regard to the totality of the
facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact
that the deceased was a qualified driver, therefore, considering
the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Minu Rout ( supra ), the monthly income of the deceased is
reassessed at Rs.6,000/- per month.
8. It is not in dispute that at the time of accident, the
deceased was aged about 35 years, therefore, 40% of the
monthly income is to be added on account of future prospects of
the deceased. Thus, after adding 40% to the monthly income on
account of future prospects, it would come to Rs.8,400/- i.e.
rd
(6,000 + 40% of 6,000). The learned Tribunal had deducted 1/3
th
instead of 1/4 of the monthly income on account of personal
expenses of the deceased as the deceased was survived by six
th
legal representatives. Therefore, 1/4 of the monthly income is
to be deducted on account of personal expenses of the deceased.
th
Thus, after deducting 1/4 on account of personal expenses, the
monthly income for calculating the loss of dependency would
th
come to Rs.6,300/- i.e. (8,400 – 1/4 of 8,400). Thus, applying
the multiplier of 16 as per the age of deceased, the loss of
dependency would come to Rs.12,09,600/- i.e. (6,300 x 12 x 16).
9. The learned Tribunal had awarded a meagre amount of
Page 5 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
compensation under the head of funeral expenses. In view of the
ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay
Sethi ( supra ), the compensation awarded under the aforesaid
head is enhanced from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.18,150/-.
10. The learned Tribunal had not awarded any compensation
under the head of loss of estate. In view of the ratio laid down by
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi ( supra ), a
sum of Rs.18,150/- is awarded under the head of loss of estate.
11. The learned Tribunal had awarded a meagre amount of
compensation under the head of loss of consortium. It is evident
from the record that the deceased was survived by six legal
representatives. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram ( supra ), all
the claimants/appellants are entitled to get the compensation
under the head of loss of consortium. Therefore, a sum of
Rs.2,90,400/- i.e. (48,400 x 6) is awarded under the head of loss
of consortium.
12. It emerges from the record that the accident in question
took place on 31.10.2004 and Dhirajbhai @ Dhirubhai Kanjibhai
died on 12.11.2004. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of
Rs.10,000/- under the head of pain, shock and suffering, a sum
of Rs.30,000/- under the head of medical expenses and further a
sum of Rs.6,000/- under the head of special diet, attendant
charges and transportation. The compensation awarded under
these heads is not under challenge, therefore, the same does not
require any interference.
Page 6 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
13. Thus, in view of the above discussion, the original
claimants/appellants shall be entitled for the following amount
of compensation under the following heads:-
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Loss of Dependency 12,09,600/-
Loss of Estate 18,150/-
Loss of Consortium 2,90,400/-
Funeral Expenses 18,150/-
Pain, Shock and Suffering 10,000/-
Medical Expenses 30,000/-
Special Diet, Attendant Charges and
Transportation
6,000/-
Total Compensation 15,82,300/-
Less: 15% Self Negligence 2,37,345/-
Total Compensation 13,44,955/-
Less: compensation already awarded by the
learned Tribunal
4,64,100/-
Additional amount of Compensation 8,80,855/-
14. In view of the above discussion, the claimants shall be
entitled for the total compensation of Rs.15,82,300/-. Out of the
total compensation 15% is deducted on account of self
negligence of the deceased. Therefore, the claimants shall be
entitled for the compensation of Rs.13,44,955/- i.e.
(Rs.15,82,300/- - 15% of 15,82,300/-).
15. The learned Tribunal had already awarded a sum of
Rs.4,64,100/-. Therefore, the claimants/appellants shall be
entitled for an additional compensation of Rs. 8,80,855/- i.e.
Page 7 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026
C/FA/848/2013 (GJHC240390162013) JUDGMENT DATED: 27/08/2026
(Rs.13,44,955/- - Rs.4,64,100/-). The learned Tribunal has
awarded the interest at the rate of 9% per annum, therefore, the
claimants/appellants shall also be entitled for the interest at the
rate of 9% on the additional amount of compensation.
16. In view of the above discussion, the captioned appeal
stands allowed partly. The impugned judgment and award is
modified to the aforesaid extent accordingly.
17. The respondent No.2- Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the additional amount of compensation along with the
interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the
claim petition till its realization, within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
18. Upon depositing the said amount, the learned Tribunal
shall disburse the amount to the original claimants, after
deducting the deficit court fees, if any, and after due verification.
Statutory amount, if any, lying/deposited with the Registry of
this Court, the same be transmitted to the concerned learned
Tribunal forthwith.
19. R & P, if any, be sent to the concerned learned Tribunal
forthwith.
20. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of,
accordingly.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
CDP
Page 8 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 12:50:59 IST 2026