MINOR PIYUSH MUKESHBHAI TALPADA THROUGH MUKESHBHAI DESAIBHAI TALPADA vs VIRENDRAKUMAR KANUBHAI RAVAL
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/FA/4434/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4434 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
MINOR PIYUSH MUKESHBHAI TALPADA THROUGH MUKESHBHAI
DESAIBHAI TALPADA
Versus
VIRENDRAKUMAR KANUBHAI RAVAL & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHSIN M HAKIM(5396) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
HARSH A VYAS(9330) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 03/07/2026
JUDGMENT
1. Captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment
and award dated 01.10.2025 passed by the Motor Accident
th
Claims Tribunal (Auxi.) and 5 Additional District Jude, at
Nadiad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.899 of 2021,
whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim
petition and awarded a sum of Rs.1,25,020/- as a compensation
along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the
date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
Page 1 of 7
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:06:00 IST 2026
C/FA/4434/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/07/2026
2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal are
that on 10.06.2021, at about 11:00 a.m., the minor claimant-
Piyush Mukeshbhai Talpada, was walking along with his mother
to purchase milk, when the accident occurred. In the meantime,
the opponent No.1 came by driving the motorcycle bearing
registration No.GJ-6-CR-3651 from opposite side, at an
excessive speed in a rash and negligent manner and hit the
minor claimant. As a result of the accident, the claimant
sustained grievous injuries.
2.1. Having been served with the notice of claim petition, the
opponent No.2-Insurance Company appeared and filed Written
Statement vide Exhibit-25, thereby denying the contents of 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.1,25,020/- as a
compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization.
2.3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and award, the appellant herein preferred the
captioned appeal on the ground of quantum.
3. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
4. Mr. Mohsin M. Hakim, learned advocate appearing on
behalf of the original claimant/appellant herein, vehemently
Page 2 of 7
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:06:00 IST 2026
C/FA/4434/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/07/2026
submitted that at the time of accident, the claimant was minor,
therefore, the learned Tribunal ought to have considered the
income of the claimant on the basis of the minimum wages
prevalent at the time of accident. In support of his contention, he
has placed reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel Versus
Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari and Anr. , reported in 2025 (0)
AIJEL-SC 75833 . He further submitted that 40% ought to have
been added to the income of the claimant on account of future
prospects. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has
assessed the functional disability of the appellant at 10% which
is not in dispute. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal
had not awarded any compensation under the head of actual
loss of income and special diet, attendant charges and
transportation. He further submitted that, considering the ratio
laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh
Nagjibhai Patel ( supra ), the claimant is entitled to be awarded
the compensation.
5. Per contra , Mr. Harsh A. Vyas, learned advocate appearing
on behalf of the respondent No.2-Insurance Company,
vehemently submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned
judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal. Hence, 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 appellant has challenged the
impugned judgment and award on the ground of quantum.
Page 3 of 7
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:06:00 IST 2026
C/FA/4434/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/07/2026
7. In the case of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel ( supra ), wherein the
Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the claimant is a minor,
his income is required to be assessed on the basis of the
minimum wages and observed in paragraph Nos.15 and 16 of
the judgment as under:-
“15. For the purpose of emphasis, it is again
clarified here that when a Tribunal or the
High Court in appeal, is concerned with the
case involving a child having suffered injury
or having passed away, the calculation of
loss of income necessarily has to be made on
the matric of minimum wages payable to a
skilled worker in the respective State at the
relevant point of time. It is our hope that this
restatement helps avoiding such errors and
thereby obviates the necessity of this Court's
interference, applying well-established
principles of law.
16. We may also observe that, in general,
i.e., accidents involving adults, we are often
confronted with situations where the
Minimum Wage Data is not readily available
and every so often, the question that has
been made up to this Court hinges only on
the calculation of income. In that view of the
matter and in the hope of reducing the
claimants need to file appeals to this Court
or even the High Court, we deem it
appropriate to direct that in cases where the
claimant has failed to furnish appropriate
details of income or adequate proof thereof, it
shall be the responsibility and obligation of
the contesting party, more particularly the
insurance company to furnish before the
Tribunal the applicable minimum wage as
duly issued by the concerned government.”
8. Thus, considering the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel ( supra ),
Page 4 of 7
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:06:00 IST 2026
C/FA/4434/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/07/2026
the income of the minor claimant is to be assessed on the basis
of the minimum wages. The accident in question took place on
10.06.2021. At the relevant point of time, the minimum wages
for the skilled worker was of Rs.9,495/- as notified by the
Government of Gujarat. Therefore, the monthly income of the
minor claimant is reassessed at Rs.9,495/-. Considering the age
of the claimant, 40% of the income is to be added on account of
future prospects of the claimant. Thus, after adding 40% to the
income, it would come to Rs.13,293/- i.e. (9495 + 40% of 9495).
9. The learned Tribunal assessed the functional disability at
10% which is not under dispute. Thus, applying the multiplier of
15 as per the age of the claimant, the future loss of income
would come to Rs.2,39,280/- i.e. (13293 x 10% x 12 x 15).
10. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.9,000/-
under the head of actual loss of income for a period of three
months. Now, the income has been reassessed, therefore, a sum
of Rs.28,485/- i.e. (9495 x 3) is awarded under the head of
actual loss of income.
11. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.16,020/-
under the head of medical expenses on the basis of the actual
medical bills proved on record. Therefore, the compensation
awarded under this head required no interference.
12. The learned Tribunal had not awarded any compensation
under the head of special diet, attendant charges and
transportation. Thus, having regard to the injuries sustained by
the claimant, period of treatment as indoor as well as outdoor
Page 5 of 7
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:06:00 IST 2026
C/FA/4434/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/07/2026
patient, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the head of
special diet, attendant charges and transportation.
13. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
under the head of mental pain, shock and suffering on the basis
of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Master Mallikarjun Versus Divisional Manager, The
National Insurance Company Limited & Anr. , reported in
2014 (14) SCC 396 . Now, the compensation has been assessed
under all the heads of compensation. Therefore, the
compensation awarded under this is reduced from Rs.1,00,000/-
to Rs.25,000/-.
14. Thus, in view of the above discussions, the original
claimant/appellant shall be entitled for the following amount of
compensation under the following heads:-
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future Loss of Income 2,39,280/-
Actual Loss of Income 28,485/-
Medical Expenses 16,020/-
Special Diet, Attendant Charges and
Transportation
15,000/-
Mental Pain, Shock and Suffering 25,000/-
Total Compensation 3,23,785/-
Less: compensation already awarded by the
learned Tribunal
1,25,020/-
Additional amount of Compensation 1,98,765/-
15. The learned Tribunal had already awarded a sum of
Rs.1,25,020/-. Therefore, the claimant/appellant shall be
Page 6 of 7
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:06:00 IST 2026
C/FA/4434/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/07/2026
entitled for the additional compensation of Rs. 1,98,765/- i. e.
(Rs.3,23,785/- -(less) Rs.1,25,020/-). The learned Tribunal has
awarded the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, therefore,
the claimant/appellant shall also be entitled for the interest at
the rate of 7.5% on the additional amount of compensation.
16. In view of the above discussions, the captioned appeal
stands allowed partly. The impugned judgment and award is
modified to the aforesaid extent.
17. The respondent No.2-Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the additional amount of compensation along with the
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of
the claim petition till its realization, within a period of 6 weeks
from today.
18. Upon depositing of the said amount, the learned Tribunal
shall disburse the amount to the original claimant/s, after
deducting the deficit court fees, if any, and after due verification.
19. Statutory amount, if any, lying/deposited with the Registry
of this Court, the same be transmitted to the concerned learned
Tribunal forthwith.
20. R & P, if any, be sent back to the concerned learned
Tribunal forthwith. No order as to costs.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
CDP
Page 7 of 7
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:06:00 IST 2026