RAHI SITANSHUBHAI PATEL vs MAHESHBHAI KABHAIBHAI THAKOR
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1443 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
RAHI SITANSHUBHAI PATEL
Versus
MAHESHBHAI KABHAIBHAI THAKOR & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHSIN M HAKIM(5396) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ANAL S SHAH(3988) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 25/06/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal is preferred against the
impugned judgment and award dated 11.09.2012 passed by
th
the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), 7 (Ad-
hoc) Additional District Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in M.A.C.P.
No. 293 of 2010, whereby the learned Tribunal has partly
allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.
9,04,000/-(Rupees Nine Lakhs Four Thousand Only) along
with interest at the rate of 8% per annum, from the date of
filing of the claim petition till realization.
2. The succinct facts, which lead to the filing of the
captioned appeal are summarized as under :-
Page 1 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
i. On 01.11.2009, Rashi Shitanshubhai Patel was
travelling as a pillion rider on an Activa
bearing Registration No. GJ-7-AM-1471, which
was being driven by Opponent No. 4 at a
moderate speed. When the said vehicle was
passing through the place of the accident,
Opponent No. 1 while driving Motorcycle
bearing Registration No. GJ-7-AS-5798 at an
excessive speed and in a rash and negligent
manner, came from the opposite direction and
dashed against the Activa. Due to the forceful
impact of the collision, Rashi Shitanshubhai
Patel sustained severe grievous injuries.
ii. The notices/summons of the Claim Petition
were duly served upon the opponents. The
opponent nos.1, 2, 4 & 5 have chosen not to
appear before the learned Tribunal, however,
the opponent no.3-Insurance Company filed
Written Statement vide Exh.13, denying the
contents of the claim petition and prayed for
dismissal of the claim petition.
iii. Having considered the pleadings of the
parties, the learned Tribunal framed the
following issues at Exh.15, for determination.
Page 2 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
i. Whether the applicant proves that he
had sustained injuries because of rash
and negligent driving on the part of
the driver, opponent no.1 of the
vehicle involved in the accident?
ii. Whether the applicant is entitled to
get compensation? If Yes, what
amount and from whom?
iii. What award and order?
iv. Having considered the oral as well as
documentary evidence on record, and having
considered the submissions of the learned
counsels for the parties, the learned Tribunal
awarded a sum of Rs. 9,04,000/-(Rupees Nine
Lakhs Four Thousand Only) along with interest
at the rate of 8% per annum, from the date of
filing of the claim petition till realization.
v. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the
impugned judgment and award, the claimant -
appellant herein preferred the present appeal.
3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
4. Mr. Mohsin Hakim, learned advocate appearing for the
claimant/appellant vehemently submitted that at the time
Page 3 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
of accident, the claimant-appellant herein was aged about
16 years and, therefore, was a minor. He sustained
functional disability of 100% as a result of accident. The
learned Tribunal assessed the income of the claimant-
appellant at Rs.18,000/- per annum, inclusive of prospective
income. It is submitted that the income of the minor ought
to have been assessed on the basis of minimum wages
prevalent at the time of accident for a skilled worker. It is
submitted that the claimant/appellant herein could not
prove the income by leading the cogent evidence,
therefore, in absence of cogent evidence, the learned
Tribunal ought to have considered minimum wages
prevalent at the time of accident. It is submitted that the
accident took place on 01.11.2009 and at the relevant point
of time, the minimum wages for a skilled worker was
Rs.3880/-. It is submitted that at the time of accident, the
claimant/appellant herein was aged about 16 years,
therefore, 40% of the monthly notional income ought to
have been added on account of future prospects of the
claimant/appellant herein.
5. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded
the meager amount of compensation under the head of
pain, shock and suffering, special diet, attendant charges
and transportation. It is submitted that no compensation
has been awarded under the heads of attendant charges,
future medical expenses, loss of amenities of life and loss of
marriage prospects. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal
ought to have awarded a “Just Compensation” under these
Page 4 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
heads. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of of
Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Baby Sakshi
Greola Vs. Manzoor Ahmad Simon and Anr. reported in
2024 SCC Online SC 3692. Having placed the reliance
upon the aforesaid judgment, he has prayed for
enhancement of the compensation.
6. Per contra, Mr.Anal Shah, learned advocate appearing
on behalf of respondent no.3-Insurance Company
vehemently submitted that at the time of the accident, the
claimant-appellant herein was aged about 16 years and was
th
studying in the 10 Standard. Therefore, he had no source
of income at the relevant time. He, therefore, submitted
that the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of
the claimant-appellant herein at Rs.18,000/- per annum
inclusive of future prospects. It is submitted that the
learned Tribunal has awarded just compensation under all
the relevant heads, considering the facts and circumstances
of the case. Hence, no interference is warranted with the
impugned award. He, therefore, prayed for rejection of the
captioned appeal.
7. Having considered the submissions advanced by the
learned counsel for the respective parties and having gone
through the record, it is to be noted that the
claimant/appellant herein has not challenged the finding
returned by the learned Tribunal on the issue of quantum.
8. So far as quantum is concerned, it is not in dispute
Page 5 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
that at the time of accident, the claimant-appellant herein
was travelling on Activa bearing Registration No.GJ-7AM-
1471 as a pillion rider. It is also an admitted position that
the claimant-appellant was aged about 16 years and was
studying in the 10th Standard at the relevant time. The
learned Tribunal, considering the year of accident, ought to
have assessed the income of the claimant-appellant herein
as per minimum wages prevalent at the time of accident.
The accident took place on 01.11.2009. At the time of
accident, the minimum wages for a skilled worker was
Rs.3880/-. Therefore, the income of the claimant-appellant
herein is reassessed as Rs.3880/-. The learned Tribunal has
not appropriately considered the aspect of future prospects.
Thus, considering the ration laid down by the Hon’ble Apex
Court in case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Pranay Sethi reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680 and Sidram
Vs. The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance
Company Limited & Anr. reported in 2022 INSC 1202 ,
40% of the monthly income is added on account of future
prospects of the claimant/appellant herein. Thus, after
adding 40% to the notional monthly income, it would come
to Rs.5432/- (Rs.3880/- + Rs.1552 (40% of Rs.3880). The
learned Tribunal has assessed the functional disability of
the claimant-appellant at 100%, which does not warrant any
interference. Therefore, applying the multiplier of 18 as per
the age of the claimant/appellant herein, the future loss of
income would come to Rs.11,73,312/- (Rs.5432/-
x100%x12x18).
Page 6 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
9. A perusal of the impugned judgment and award
further reveals that the learned Tribunal has not awarded
any separate compensation under the head of attendant
charges. The medical evidence on record indicates that the
claimant-appellant has suffered 100% disability and has
become wholly dependent upon his family members and/or
an attendant for his day-to-day activities. Owing to his
physical condition, the claimant-appellant could not appear
before the learned Tribunal to depose. Consequently, his
mother filed an affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief and
entered the witness box for the purpose of cross-
examination on his behalf. The Disability Certificates
produced on record at Exhs. 33 and 34 establish the extent
of disability suffered by the claimant-appellant. In the said
disability certificate, Dr.Balkisan N.Desai (M.S.) Neuro-
Surgeon noted that at the time of accident,
claimant/appellant herein was taken to Nadiad Civil
Hospital, and thereafter, he was referred to Sal Hospital,
Ahmedabad, and thereafter, he was admitted in Indus
Hospital. The Doctor has observed that he was put on
ventilator for a considerable period. His tracheostomy was
removed on 04.12.2009. On discharge from hospital, he was
on Ryle’s tube feeding and had urinary catheter. The
Doctor further observed that he is conscious and oriented.
He is none hypertensive & none diabetic. He has throbbing
headache every day, lasting few hours. He has emotional
disturbances in form increase cerebral irritability, causing
excessive loss of temper. He has euphoria (false sense of
well being). He behaves very childishly. (all the time during
Page 7 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
my examination, he goes on playing with his mobile phone).
All these emotional disturbance are due to his irreversible
organic brain damage. He has also observed that
neurologically, he has very minimal residual weakness of
the right side of the body. He can walk freely and can use
right upper limb normally. He has dimness of vision in the
left eyes. He further observed that, in my opinion, his
present symptoms are due his head injury, causing skull
fractures, hematoma in the brain and brain contusion,
resulting in an irreversible brain damage, both parenchymal
as well as organic, producing permanent disability, which is
assessed at 80% body as a whole. The Doctor further
observed that he will have to take anti-convulsant drug for
many years, may be life time.
10. Dr.Supreet Prabhu, M.S. (E.N.T.), E-N-T- Hospital has
also certified that owing to the head injury and leading to
residual neurological damage and facio-maxillary multiple
injuries, leading to malocclusion of jaws. His problem of
malocclusion of jaws is leading to an inability to eat solids
properly and has to be on a liquid diet. He also certified that
he has sustained disability of 35% body as a whole.
11. Considering the medical evidence available on record,
and more particularly the Disability Certificates issued by
the aforesaid doctors and proved at Exhs. 33 and 34, it is
evident that the claimant-appellant has suffered 100%
disability and has become wholly dependent upon his family
members and/or an attendant for carrying out his day-to-
Page 8 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
day activities. The evidence on record further establishes
that the claimant-appellant requires the assistance of an
attendant on a round-the-clock basis. The Hon’ble Apex
Court, in the case of Baby Sakshi Greola (supra), in
Paragraph No.46, observed as under:-
“46. We find that, the approach of the High Court on
appreciation of the evidence that the appellant would only be
requiring a part time attendant is erroneous. On the contrary,
we are of the opinion that the appellant, would be dependent
on an attendant throughout her life and on a full-time basis.
Considering her medical situation, the attendant would have
to be skilled and not unskilled. The appellant would be
requiring special care and attention which can only be
provided by a skilled attendant. It was, therefore, incorrect
on the part of the High Court to proceed on the basis that the
appellant could be taken care of by an unskilled attendant
and that too on a part-time basis.”
12. Thus, considering the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of Baby Sakshi Greola (supra), the
claimant-appellant herein is entitled to get the
compensation under the head of attendant charges on the
basis of monthly salary of “skilled worker” prevalent at the
relevant point of time. Hence, accordingly, a sum of
Rs.8,38,080/- (Rs.3880/- x 12 x 18) is awarded under the
head of loss of attendant charges. The learned Tribunal had
awarded a meagre amount of compensation under the head
of pain, shock and suffering.
13. As discussed herein above, it is evident that the
Page 9 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
claimant-appellant herein sustained grievous injuries in the
accident, which ultimately resulted in 100% disability. The
record further reveals that he remained hospitalized for a
considerable period and was also required to be kept on
ventilator support during the course of treatment. He
underwent treatment at various hospitals viz. Civil Hospital,
Nadiad, Sal Hospital and Indus Hospital. During the period
of hospitalization and treatment, and even thereafter, the
claimant-appellant herein endured immense pain, shock,
suffering and mental agony. Having regard to the nature of
injuries, the prolonged treatment undergone by him and the
extent of permanent disability suffered, the claimant-
appellant is entitled to appropriate compensation under the
head of pain, shock and suffering. The Hon’ble Apex Court,
in the case of Baby Sakshi Greola (supra), in Paragraph
Nos.35 & 36 observed as under:-
“ 35 . In this respect, it would be appropriate to refer to
paragraphs 26 and 27 of the judgment of this Court in the case
of Kajal (supra), which read thus:
“ Pain, suffering and loss of amenities
26. Coming to the non-pecuniary damages under the
head of pain, suffering, loss of amenities, the High Court
has awarded this girl only Rs 3,00,000. In Mallikarjun v.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. [Mallikarjun v. National
Insurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 14 SCC 396 : (2015) 1 SCC
(Civ) 335 : (2015) 1 SCC (Cri) 372 : (2013) 10 Scale
668] , this Court while dealing with the issue of award
under this head held that it should be at least Rs
6,00,000, if the disability is more than 90%. As far as the
present case is concerned, in addition to the 100%
physical disability, the young girl is suffering from severe
incontinence, she is suffering from severe hysteria and
above all she is left with a brain of a nine-month- old
child. This is a case where departure has to be made
Page 10 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
from the normal rule and the pain and suffering suffered
by this child is such that no amount of compensation can
compensate.
27. One factor which must be kept in mind while
assessing the compensation in a case like the present
one is that the claim can be awarded only once. The
claimant cannot come back to court for enhancement of
award at a later stage praying that something extra has
been spent. Therefore, the courts or the Tribunals
assessing the compensation in a case of 100% disability,
especially where there is mental disability also, should
take a liberal view of the matter when awarding the
compensation. While awarding this amount, we are not
only taking the physical disability but also the mental
disability and various other factors. This child will remain
bedridden for life. Her mental age will be that of a nine-
month-old child. Effectively, while her body grows, she
will remain a small baby. We are dealing with a girl who
will physically become a woman but will mentally remain
a 9-month-old child. This girl will miss out playing with
her friends. She cannot communicate; she cannot enjoy
the pleasures of life; she cannot even be amused by
watching cartoons or films; she will miss out the fun of
childhood, the excitement of youth; the pleasures of a
marital life; she cannot have children who she can love,
let alone grandchildren. She will have no pleasure. Her's
is a vegetable existence. Therefore, we feel in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the case even after
taking a very conservative view of the matter an amount
payable for the pain and suffering of this child should be
at least Rs 15,00,000.” (emphasis supplied)
36 . This Court has observed that it has to be borne in mind that
while assessing compensation in a case like the present one, the
claim can be awarded only once. It was observed that the
claimant cannot come back to the court for enhancement at a
later stage praying that something extra has been spent. This
Court further observed that courts or tribunals assessing
compensation in a case of 100% disability, especially where
there is mental disability also, should take a liberal view of the
mater when awarding compensation. It was observed that while
awarding this amount, courts are not only taking into account
physical disability but also mental disability and various other
factors. ”
14. Thus, having regarding the totality of facts and
circumstances of the case, the compensation awarded by
Page 11 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
the learned Tribunal under the head of pain, shock and
suffering is enhanced from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.8,00,000/-.
15. It is not in dispute that, at the time of the accident, the
claimant-appellant here was aged about 16 years. As a
result of the grievous injuries sustained in the vehicular
accident dated 01.11.2009, the claimant-appellant has
suffered 100% permanent disability. The nature and extent
of the disability have undoubtedly had a substantial adverse
impact on his prospects of leading a normal social and
personal life, including his prospects of marriage. Despite
these circumstances, the learned Tribunal has not awarded
any compensation under the head of loss of marriage
prospects. Therefore, having regard to the facts of the case
and considering the principles laid down by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of Baby Sakshi Greola (supra), this
Court deems it appropriate to award a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-
towards loss of marriage prospects.
16. As discussed herein above, the claimant-appellant
herein has suffered 100% permanent disability. Therefore,
he has been deprived of leading a normal life and is unable
to enjoy the ordinary amenities and pleasures of life in the
manner he would have but for the accident. However, the
learned Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under
the head of loss of amenities of life. Hence, a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded under the head of loss of
amenities of life.
Page 12 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
17. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.5,45,000/- under the head of medical expenses on the
basis of the bill produced on record. Therefore, no
interference is required under this head. However, it is to be
noted that Dr.Balkisan N.Desai (M.S.) Neuro-Surgeon has
opined that the claimant-appellant herein has to take
medicines for long time or may be till entire life. However,
the learned Tribunal had not awarded any compensation
under the head of future medial expenses. Thus,
considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant
– appellant herein and having regard to the attending facts
and circumstances of the case, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- is
awarded under the head of future medical expenses.
18. The learned Tribunal had awarded the compensation
of Rs.25,000/- under the head of special diet, attendant
charges and transportation. This Court has already awarded
the compensation separately under the head of attendant
charges. The learned Tribunal had awarded a meagre
amount of compensation under the head of special diet and
transportation. Having regard to the nature of injuries
sustained by the claimant-appellant herein, the prolonged
period of hospitalization undergone by him and the
subsequent treatment received as an outdoor patient, this
Court is of the view that the compensation awarded under
the heads of special diet and transportation is on the lower
side. Accordingly, the compensation under the heads of
special diet and transportation is enhanced from
Rs.12,000/- to Rs.25,000/-.
Page 13 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
19. Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the
claimants shall be entitled for the following compensation:-
Sr. No. Heads Amount Awarded in
rupees.
1 Future loss of income 11,73,312/-
2 Attendant Charges (+) 8,38,080/-
3 Pain, Shock and Suffering (+) 8,00,000/-
4 Loss of Marriage
(+) 3,00,000/-
Prospects
5 Loss of Amenities of Life (+) 1,00,000/-
6. Future Medical Expenses. (+) 2,00,000/-
7. Medical Expenses (+) 5,45,000/-
8. Special Diet and
Transportation Expenses
(+) 25,000/-
TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 39,81,392/-
Compensation awarded by
impugned Judgment and
Award dated 28.12.2023.
(-) Rs. 9,04,000/-
Enhanced amount of
(=) Rs. 30,77,392/-
compensation
20. Thus, in view of the above discussions, the claimant-
appellant herein shall be entitled for an additional
compensation of Rs.30,77,392/- (Rs.39,81,392/- –
Rs.9,04,000/-). The learned Tribunal has awarded the
interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of the
claim petition till its realization. Therefore, the claimant
shall also be entitled for the same rate of interest on the
additional amount of compensation from the date of filing of
the claim petition till its realization.
Page 14 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026
C/FA/1443/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
21. In view of the above discussions, the captioned appeal
stands allowed partly and judgment and award is modified
to that extent. The Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the additional compensation amount along with
interest, with the concerned learned Tribunal within a
period of six weeks from today. Upon depositing the said
amount of compensation, learned Tribunal shall disburse
the entire awarded amount of compensation along with
interest to the claimant - appellant herein after due
verification.
22. If any amount is lying deposited in the captioned
appeal with the Registry of this court, the same may be
transmitted to the concerned learned Tribunal. Records &
Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned learned
Tribunal. No order as to costs.
23. Pending application, if any stands disposed of.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
GIRISH
Page 15 of 15
Uploaded by GIRISH K PARMAR(HC00954) on Wed Jul 01 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 01 18:04:44 IST 2026