PRAVINKUMAR UDESINH BARIA'S THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS vs MOHAMMAD AIYUB MOHAMMAD ISMAIL CHHIPA

C/FA/2820/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240398252013)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2820 of 2013
================================================================
PRAVINKUMAR UDESINH BARIA'S THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS & ORS.
Versus
MOHAMMAD AIYUB MOHAMMAD ISMAIL CHHIPA & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR MTM HAKIM(1190) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA

Date : 15/10/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
1. The occurrence of accident on 12.11.2008 between
motorcycle and truck is not in dispute. As a result of the accident,
rider of the motorcycle, who was aged about 34 years and was
working as a driver in the District and Sessions Court, was killed in
the accident. The claimants therefore filed a claim petition and
sought for compensation. The Tribunal, on consideration of the
evidence, come to conclusion that the accident occurred due to the
negligence of both, the rider of the motorcycle as well as the driver
of the truck. In fact, by consent, the contributory negligence of the
deceased was assessed at 15% and the driver of the truck was
found to be negligent to the extent of 85%.
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Sat Oct 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 17 13:30:45 IST 2026

C/FA/2820/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240398252013)
2. On the last occasion, when the matter was heard, an
argument was advanced that the deceased was entitled to receive a
higher salary that what was indicated in the award due to the
th
revision of pay scales as a result of the recommendations of the 6
Pay Commission. In order to facilitate the said argument, the
District Court was directed to furnish a document indicating the
emoluments that the deceased would have received as on the date
of accident. Pursuant to the said order, the District Court,
Panchmahals, Godhara has given a letter stating that the deceased
would have been entitled to a sum of Rs.11,502/- per month as a
consequence of revision of pay scales. In the light of the above, we
are inclined to accept this sum as the monthly income of the
deceased.
3. Learned Counsel for the Insurer, however, seeks to
argue that the amounts that were paid as transport allowance,
medical allowance and washing allowance ought not to be included.
We are not inclined to accept this argument since it is a settled law
that all allowances do for a part of salary. As the deceased was a
government servant, 50% future prospects will have to be added.
Consequently, his income would be Rs.2,05,596. As he was aged
34 years, he would be entitled to multiplier of 16 and each of the
claimants would also be entitled for loss of consortium and also the
conventional heads. In all, the claimants would be entitled to the
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Sat Oct 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 17 13:30:45 IST 2026

C/FA/2820/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240398252013)
following sums:-
Dependency benefit
(I) Actual salary Rs.1,37,064/- pa
(Rs.11,422 X 12)
(II) Future Rs.68,532/- pa
Rs.1,37,064 pa X 50%
prospective rise)
Rs.2,05,596/- pa
(III) Deduction of
amount spent by
deceased on himself
Rs.41,119/- pa
((1/5th of Rs.2,05,596/-
pa)
(IV) Dependency
benefits
Rs.1,64,477/- pa
Multiplier 16
(A) Loss of dependency
benefits
Rs.26,31,632/-
(B) Conventional
amount for loss of
estate
Rs.19,965/-
(C) Conventional
amount for loss of
consortium
Rs.4,79,160/-
(Rs.53,240/- X 9
claimants)
(D) Funeral expenses Rs.19,965/-
Total Rs.31,50,722/-
15% negligence Rs.4,72,608/-
Total compensation to
be awarded
Rs.26,78,114/-
(Rs.31,50,722 –
Rs.4,72,608)
4. The appeal is hereby PARTLY ALLOWED . The
claimants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.9,71,824/-
(Rs.26,78,114/- less compensation already awarded by the
Tribunal, i.e. Rs.17,06,290/-) with 9% interest from the date of the
claim petition filed by the claimants before the Tribunal till its
realization. The enhanced amount shall be deposited by the
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Sat Oct 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 17 13:30:45 IST 2026

C/FA/2820/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240398252013)
Insurance Company within a period of EIGHT weeks from the date
of receipt of copy of this order. The enhanced amount which shall
be deposited pursuant to this order shall be disbursed to the
claimants upon proper verification by NEFT / RTGS.
5. R & P if called for, be sent back to the concerned Court
forthwith.
(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA,J)
(J. L. ODEDRA, J)
SHITOLE
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Sat Oct 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 17 13:30:45 IST 2026