RAHUL KUMBHABHAI DAFDA vs SAVJI BHURA VARCHAND
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2451 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
RAHUL KUMBHABHAI DAFDA
Versus
SAVJI BHURA VARCHAND & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR. ALKESH N SHAH(3749) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 25/08/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned
judgment and award dated 13.07.2018 passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.-3), Gandhidham at Kachchh in
Motor Accident Claim Petition No.88 of 2015, whereby the
learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and
awarded a sum of Rs.9,02,737/- as compensation along with
interest at the rate of 7% 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 11.02.2015, the claimant- Rahul
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
Kumbhabhai Dafda was travelling in a Luxury Bus bearing
registration No.GJ-12-T-4793 and was going to Bhachau from
Manfara. Original opponent No.1 was driving the said bus at an
excessive speed, in a rash and negligent manner. When they
reached the place of the accident, one of the tyres of the said bus
burst, and the driver lost control over the bus. As a result, the
bus turned turtle, and the claimant sustained grievous injuries.
2.1. Having been served with the notice of the claim petition,
the opponent No.3- Insurance Company appeared and filed
Written Statement at Exhibit-34, thereby denying the averments
made in the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the claim
petition. The original opponent Nos.1 & 2 did not appear before
the learned Tribunal.
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.9,02,737/- as compensation
along with interest at the rate of 7% 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 appellant herein preferred the
captioned appeal on the ground of quantum.
3. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
4. Mr. Hiren M. Modi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
the original claimant/appellant herein vehemently submitted
that at the time of accident, the claimant was working in Momay
Pathology Laboratory as a lab assistant and thereby earning
Rs.8,000/- per month. It is submitted that the salary certificate
was proved on record at Exhibit-55, and the owner of Momay
Pathology Laboratory was examined as a witness at Exhibit-31
in order to prove the income of the claimant. However, the
learned Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the
claimant/appellant at Rs.4,000/-. It is submitted that the
finding returned by the learned Tribunal on the point of income
is perverse, therefore, the income of the claimant/appellant
ought to have been assessed at Rs.8,000/- per month. It is
submitted that 40% of the monthly income ought to have been
added on account of future prospects of the claimant. In support
of his contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment
rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. , reported in
(2017) 16 SCC 680 and Sidram Vs. The Divisional Manager,
United India Insurance Company Limited and Anr. , reported
in (2023) 3 SCC 439 .
4.1. Learned Advocate for the appellant further submitted that
the learned Tribunal had assessed the functional disability of the
claimant/appellant at 43%, which is not in dispute.
4.2. Learned advocate for the appellant further submitted that
the learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.5,10,717/- under
the head of medical expenses, the compensation awarded under
this head is not under challenge.
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
4.3. Learned advocate for the appellant further submitted that
the learned Tribunal had awarded a meager amount of
compensation under the heads of pain, shock, and suffering,
special diet, attendant charges, transportation, and actual loss
of income. Therefore, he prayed for enhancement of
compensation under these heads.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Alkesh N. Shah, learned advocate
appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3- Insurance Company
submitted that at the time of the accident, the
claimant/appellant was working as a lab assistant in Momay
Pathology Laboratory. It is submitted that the income was not
sufficiently proved by leading the cogent evidence, therefore, the
learned Tribunal had rightly assessed the income of the claimant
at Rs.4,000/-. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal had
awarded just compensation under all the heads of
compensation. 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.
7. So far as quantum is concerned, it is the case of the
claimant/appellant that at the time of the accident, the claimant
was serving in Momay Pathology Laboratory as a lab assistant. It
emerges from the record that the claimant/appellant has proved
the salary certificate at Exhibit-55. It also emerges from the
Page 4 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
record that the claimant/appellant also examined the proprietor
of Momay Pathology Laboratory at Exhibit-31. He deposed that
he was running the aforesaid laboratory. He also deposed that
the claimant/appellant was working with him and he was paying
Rs.8,000/- per month as salary. In view of the aforesaid oral as
well as documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal ought to
have assessed the monthly income of the claimant/appellant at
Rs.8,000/-. In light of oral as well as documentary evidence on
record, the income of the claimant is reassessed at Rs.8,000/-
per month. Considering the age of the claimant, 40% of the
monthly 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.11,200/- i.e. (8,000 + 40% of 8,000). The learned
Tribunal assessed the functional disability at 43%, which is not
under dispute. Thus, applying the multiplier of 18 as per the age
of the claimant, the future loss of income would come to
Rs.10,40,256/- i.e. (11,200 x 43% x 12 x 18).
8. The learned Tribunal had awarded actual loss of income for
a period of two months. It emerges from the record that after
accident, the claimant underwent several surgical intervention
and he remained hospitalized for a considerable time. Thereafter,
he received treatment as an outdoor patient. Thus, considering
the medical evidence on record and having regard to the totality
of the facts and circumstances, the actual loss of income is
required to be awarded for a period of eight months. Hence, a
sum of Rs.64,000/- (8,000 x 8) is awarded under the head of
actual loss of income.
Page 5 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
9. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.5,10,717/-
under the head of medical expenses. The compensation awarded
under this head is not under challenge, therefore, the same does
not require any interference.
10. The learned Tribunal had awarded a meagre amount of
compensation under the head of pain, shock, and suffering. It
emerges from the record that after the accident, the
claimant/appellant was taken to Bhachau Government Hospital
and thereafter, he was referred to Vagad Welfare Hospital. From
there, he was referred to Hari Om Trust Hospital, Adipur, for
further treatment, and from there to Wockhardt Hospital, Rajkot,
where he was surgically operated upon several times. It also
emerges from the record that the claimant remained bedridden
for a period of eight months. The disability certificate proved at
Exhibit-45, which would reflect that the claimant cannot stand
without support and he is unable to walk without a walker.
Thus, considering the nature of injuries sustained by the
claimant and having regard to the totality of the facts and
circumstances, the compensation awarded under the head of
pain, shock and suffering is enhanced from Rs.7,500/- to
Rs.1,00,000/-.
11. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-
under the head of special diet, attendant charges and
transportation. Considering the all attending circumstances, the
compensation awarded under the head of special diet, attendant
charges and transportation is enhanced from Rs.5,000/- to
Rs.50,000/-.
Page 6 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
12. Thus, in view of the above discussion, the original
claimant/appellant shall be entitled for the following amount of
compensation under the following heads:-
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Future Loss of Income 10,40,256/-
Actual Loss of Income 64,000/-
Medical Expenses 5,10,717/-
Special Diet, Attendant Charges and
Transportation
50,000/-
Pain, Shock and Suffering 1,00,000/-
Total Compensation 17,64,973/-
Less: compensation already awarded by the
learned Tribunal
9,02,737/-
Additional amount of Compensation 8,62,236/-
13. The learned Tribunal had already awarded a sum of
Rs.9,02,737/-. Therefore, the claimant/appellant shall be
entitled for the additional compensation of Rs. 8,62,236/- i.e.
(Rs.17,64,973/- - Rs.9,02,737/-). The learned Tribunal has
awarded the interest at the rate of 7% per annum, therefore, the
claimant/appellant shall also be entitled for the interest at the
rate of 7% on the additional amount of compensation.
14. In view of the above discussion, the captioned appeal
stands allowed partly. The impugned judgment and award is
modified to the aforesaid extent.
15. The respondent No.3- Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the additional amount of compensation along with the
interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing of the
Page 7 of 8
Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026
C/FA/2451/2019 (GJHC240651982018) JUDGMENT DATED: 25/08/2026
claim petition till its realization, within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
16. Upon depositing the said amount, the learned Tribunal
shall disburse the amount to the original claimant, 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.
17. R & P, if any, be sent to the concerned learned Tribunal
forthwith.
18. 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 Mon Aug 31 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 01:35:43 IST 2026