GEETABEN MUKUNDBHAI DOSHI vs BHIKHUBHAI NATHABHAI GOHEL-DARBAR
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2250 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
GEETABEN MUKUNDBHAI DOSHI & ORS.
Versus
BHIKHUBHAI NATHABHAI GOHEL-DARBAR & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
ADVOCATE NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR TANMAY B KARIA(6833) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 30/06/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and
award dated 02.07.2018 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Auxiliary), Rajkot in MACP No.1065/2006, whereby the
learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a
sum of Rs.55,000/- as a compensation along with interest at the rate of
9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.
2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal are that on
18.07.2006, at about 7:00 pm, when the deceased-Mukundbhai
Page 1 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
Ghelabhai Doshi was going as pedestrian on Junagadh road on the left
side of the road, in the meantime, the driver of the motorcycle bearing
registration no.GJ-3-E-4884 came by driving the said motorcycle at an
excessive speed, in rash and negligent manner and hit the deceased,
thereby caused the accident. Due to the impact of the said accident, the
deceased sustained severe injuries and succumbed to the injuries
during treatment.
3. On being served, the respondent no.2/insurance company filed its
written statement at Exh.18, thereby denying all the averments made in
the claim petition and prayed for rejection of the claim petition.
4. Having considered the pleadings, evidence led by the respective
parties and the submissions canvassed by the respective parties, the
learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a
sum of Rs.55,000/- as a compensation along with interest at the rate of
9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.
5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and
award, the appellants have challenged the impugned judgment and
award on the ground of quantum and the eligibility of the sons to claim
the compensation on account of death of their father in a vehicular
accident..
6. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
7. Mr. Hemal Shah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
original claimants/appellants herein vehemently submitted that at the
time of accident, the deceased was aged about 70 years and he was
Page 2 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
engaged in the business of decoration and lighting under the name and
style of M/s. Evermaster Radio Engineering and thereby earning the
considerable amount. He further submitted that the deceased used to
file the income tax returns and his income tax returns filed for the
assessment years 2001-2002 to 2006-2007 have been duly proved on
record. He further submitted that the deceased was survived by his
widow and two sons, who filed the claim petition but during the
pendency of the claim petition, the widow of the deceased had expired
in the year 2012, therefore, her name was deleted from the array of
parties. The learned Tribunal disallowed the compensation under the
head of loss of dependency on the ground that the sons were not
dependent upon the deceased and the widow has already been expired
during the pendency of the claim petition. He submitted that the learned
Tribunal has committed the gross error in disallowing the claim of the
claimants under the head of loss of dependency. In support of his
contention, learned counsel for the appellants placed the reliance upon
the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of National
Insurance Company Ltd. v. Birender Singh & Ors., reported in 2020
(11) SCC 356, New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Anand Pal,
reported in 2023 (0) AIJEL-SC 73185 and Jitender Kumar Vs. Sanjay
Prasad, reported in 2025 (0) AIJEL-SC 75499. Having placed the
reliance upon the aforesaid judgments, learned counsel for the
appellants prayed that the impugned judgment and award is required to
be modified to the aforesaid extent.
8. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that the
learned Tribunal has awarded meagre amount of compensation under
the conventional heads. In support of his contention, learned counsel for
the appellants has placed the reliance upon the judgment of Hon’ble
Page 3 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
Apex Court rendered in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd.
Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680 and Magma General
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and
Ors., reported in 2018 (18) SCC 130. Having placed the reliance upon
the aforesaid judgments, he prayed for enhancement of compensation.
9. Per contra, Mr. Tanmay B. Karia, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of respondent no.2/insurance company vehemently submitted
that the claim petition came to be filed by the widow and two sons and
during the pendency of the claim petition, the widow has expired. He
submitted that the other claimants i.e. the sons are having their
independent source of income, therefore, they cannot be held to be
dependent upon the deceased. He submitted that the learned Tribunal
has rightly disallowed the compensation under the head of loss of
dependency. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has
awarded just compensation under conventional heads, therefore, the
captioned appeal is liable to be dismissed.
10. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsels for
the parties and having gone through the record, it is to be noted that the
original claimants/appellants have challenged the impugned judgment
and award on the ground of quantum and the eligibility of the sons to
claim the compensation on account of death of their father in a vehicular
accident.
11. So far as the quantum is concerned, the learned Tribunal has
disallowed the claim under the head of future loss of dependency on the
ground that the widow of the deceased-Mukundbhai Ghelabhai Doshi
has already expired during the pendency of the petition in the year
Page 4 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
2012, while the original claimant nos.2 and 3 are the sons, who are
doing their independent business, therefore, they cannot be held to be
dependent upon the deceased. Now the question arises as to whether
the sons of the deceased can claim the compensation on account of
death of their father. Section 166 of the MV Act enumerates the
categories of the persons, who can claim the compensation on account
of death or injury sustained in a vehicular accident and the same are
reproduced hereinunder:-
“(1) An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the
nature specified in sub-section (1) of section 165 may be made--
(a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or
(b) by the owner of the property; or
(c) where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal
representatives of the deceased; or
(d) by any agent duly authorised by the person injured or all or any of
the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case may be:
Provided that where all the legal representatives of the deceased have not
joined in any such application for compensation, the application shall be
made on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal representatives of the
deceased and the legal representatives who have not so joined, shall be
impleaded as respondents to the application.
Provided further that where a person accepts compensation under section
164 in accordance with the procedure provided under section 149, his
claims petition before the Claims Tribunal shall lapse.
(2) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be made, at the option of
the claimant, either to the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area
in which the accident occurred or to the Claims Tribunal within the local
Page 5 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
limits of whose jurisdiction the claimant resides or carries on business or
within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the defendant resides, and shall
be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed:
3 .*
(3) No application for compensation shall be entertained unless it is made
within six months of the occurrence of the accident.
(4) The Claims Tribunal shall treat any report of accidents forwarded to it
under section 159 as an application for compensation under this Act.
(5) Notwithstanding anything in this Act or any other law for the time being
in force, the right of a person to claim compensation for injury in an
accident shall, upon the death of the person injured, survive to his legal
representatives, irrespective of whether the cause of death is relatable to
or had any nexus with the injury or not.”
12. As per Section 166 (1) of the MV Act, the following persons can
claim the compensation on account of death or injury sustained in a
vehicular accident:-
(a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or
(b) by the owner of the property; or
(c) where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal
representatives of the deceased; or
(d) by any agent duly authorised by the person injured or all or any of the
legal representatives of the deceased, as the case may be:
13. Clause (1)(c) of Section 166 is amply clear that the legal
representatives of the deceased can claim the compensation on
Page 6 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
account of death. The said issue came for consideration before the
Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Birender & Ors. (supra), wherein the
Hon’ble Apex Court, in para 14 of the judgment, has observed as
under:-
“14. It is thus settled by now that the legal representatives of the deceased
have a right to apply for compensation. Having said that, it must
necessarily follow that even the major married and earning sons of the
deceased being legal representatives have a right to apply for
compensation and it would be the bounden duty of the Tribunal to consider
the application irrespective of the fact whether the concerned legal
representative was fully dependant on the deceased and not to limit the
claim towards conventional heads only. The evidence on record in the
present case would suggest that the claimants were working as
agricultural labourers on contract basis and were earning meagre income
between Rs.1,00,000/ and Rs.1,50,000/ per annum. In that sense, they
were largely dependant on the earning of their mother and in fact, were
staying with her, who met with an accident at the young age of 48 years.”
14. Similarly, in case of Anand Pal (supra), the brothers and sisters
were held not to be dependents because they would either be earning
members themselves, married or dependent upon their father.
15. Further, in case of Jitender Kumar (supra), the married sons and
an unmarried daughter filed the claim petition for claiming the
compensation. The Hon’ble Apex Court, in para 12 of the judgment, has
observed as under:-
“12. The High Court has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Birender, 2020) 11 SCC 356 to observe that
Page 7 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
the claimant-appellant(s) are legal representatives of the deceased and
have a right to apply for compensation. Thereafter, in its discussion, the
Court observed that the claimant-appellant(s) have not been shown to be
dependents on the deceased and consequently, a deduction of 50% is to
be made to determine the compensation to be received by the claimant-
appellant(s).”
16. Further, in case of Manjuri Bera Vs. Oriental Insurance
Company Ltd. & Anr., reported in 2007 (10) SCC 643, the Hon’ble
Apex Court has held that a married daughter can also claim the
compensation on account of death of her parents. Similarly, in case of
N. Jayasree Vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company
Ltd., reported in AIR OnLINE 2021 SC 923, the Hon’ble Apex Court has
held that the brother’s sister and brother’s children can also claim the
compensation.
17. Even in case of Montford Brothers of St. Gabriel & Anr. Vs.
United India Insurance Company Ltd. , reported in 2014 (3) SCC 394,
the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the successor to the trustees of
trust property can also be considered as a legal representative. The MP
High Court, in case of Mahant Shyamdas Guru Mohandas Vs.
Lalaram M. Kori & Ors., reported in AIR 2008 MP 47, also held that
even a Gurubhai of an Ashram can be considered as a legal
representative.
18. Thus, in view of the catena of judgments of the Hon’ble Apex
Court as well as High Court, I am of the considered view that the
claimant nos.2 and 3, who are the sons can claim the compensation on
account of death of their father. Further in case of Kirti & Anr. Vs.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., reported in (2021) 2 SCC 166, the
Page 8 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the dependency has to be seen at the
time of filing of the claim petition. In the present case, the claim petition
came to be filed by the widow and two sons. Therefore, at the time of
accident, the widow was also dependent upon the deceased.
Accordingly, the widow has an independent right to claim the
compensation on account of death of her husband. Thus, I am of the
considered view that the learned Tribunal has erroneously disallowed
the claim of the claimants under the head of loss of dependency.
19. So far as the quantum is concerned, The income tax returns have
been proved at Exhs.55, 58, 61, 64, 67 and 70. Perusal of these returns
would show that the income tax return at Exh.70 was filed for the
financial year 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2006. The said return came to be
filed on 22.09.2006. The accident in question took place on 18.07.2006.
As per the said income tax return, the gross income of the deceased
was Rs.1,82,878/- per annum, it further shows that he has paid the tax
of Rs.1,840/-, therefore, the net income would come to Rs.1,81,038/-
per annum. Therefore, the income of the deceased is assessed at
Rs.1,81,038/- per annum. At the time of accident, the deceased was
survived by 3 legal representatives. Thus, in view of the ratio laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Pranay Sethi (supra), 1/3 of the
income is deducted on account of personal expenses of the deceased.
Thus, after deducting 1/3 on account of personal expenses of the
deceased, the annual income would come to Rs.1,20,692/- i.e.
(1,81,038-1,81,038X1/3). It is not in dispute that at the time of accident,
the deceased was aged about 70 years, therefore, the multiplier of 5 is
to be applied. Thus, applying the multiplier of 5, the future loss of
dependency would come to Rs.6,03,460/- i.e. (1,20,692X5).
Page 9 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
20. The learned Tribunal has awarded meagre amount of
compensation under the conventional heads, therefore, a sum of
Rs.18,150/- is awarded under the head of funeral expenses and a sum
of Rs.18,150/- is awarded under the head of loss of estate.
21. It is not in dispute that the deceased was survived by 3 legal
representatives i.e. his widow and two sons. In view of the ratio laid
down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram
(supra), all the legal representatives are entitled to get the
compensation under the head of loss of consortium. Hence accordingly,
a sum of Rs.1,45,200/- i.e. (48,400X3) is awarded under the head of
loss of consortium.
22. In view of the above discussion, the appellants/claimants shall be
entitled for the following amount of compensation under the following
heads:-
Sr. No. Particular Amount
1. Future loss of dependency 6,03,460/-
2. Loss of consortium 1,45,200/-
3. Loss of estate 18,150/-
4. Funeral expenses 18,150/-
Total 7,84,960/-
23. The learned Tribunal has already awarded a sum of Rs.55,000/-
as a compensation, therefore, the original claimants/appellants shall be
entitled for additional compensation of Rs.7,29,960/- i.e. (7,84,960-
55,000). The learned Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of
9% per annum, therefore, the original claimants/appellants shall be
entitled for the same rate of interest on additional amount of
Page 10 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026
C/FA/2250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/06/2026
compensation from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.
24. In view of the above discussion, the captioned appeal stands
allowed partly and the impugned judgment and award is to be modified
to the aforesaid extent. The respondent no.2/insurance company shall
deposit the additional amount of compensation along with interest within
a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
25. Upon depositing of the said amount of compensation, the learned
Tribunal shall disburse the entire amount of compensation along with
interest to the original claimants/appellants herein after deducting deficit
of Court fee, if any, after due verification. The amount, if any, lying
deposited with the registry of this Court, the same shall be transmitted
to the learned Tribunal concerned. No order as to costs.
26. Record & Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the learned
Tribunal concerned.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
HARSHIT
Page 11 of 11
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Sat Jul 04 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 04 16:04:54 IST 2026