Gujarat High Court

Addition of Future Prospects and Enhancement of Actual Income Loss in Motor Accident Disability Compensation

RAMESHBHAI KALYANBHAI CHAUHAN vs RAKESHKUMAR ISHWARLAL PATEL

Gujarat High CourtJUDGMENT: July 16, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

On May 8, 2011, the appellant was a pillion rider on a motorcycle that was struck from behind by a car driven rashly by respondent No. 1.

Source reference: para 2(i)

The appellant sustained a trimalleolar fracture and compound Grade-I fracture of the medial malleolus.

Source reference: para 10

On July 19, 2024, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded Rs. 1,76,257/- with 9% interest in M.A.C.P. No. 656 of 2017.

Source reference: para 1

The appellant preferred this appeal seeking enhancement, contending that the Tribunal failed to consider future prospects and awarded inadequate sums for actual loss of income and non-pecuniary heads.

Source reference: para 4
02

Issues

Whether the claimant is entitled to an addition for future prospects in the calculation of future loss of income.

Source reference: para 9

Whether the compensation awarded under the heads of actual loss of income, pain and suffering, and special diet/attendant charges is just and adequate.

Source reference: paras 10–12
03

Law Applied

The principles for calculating compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Source reference: no citation

National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 to justify adding a percentage for "future prospects" to the victim's income.

Source reference: para 9

Sidram v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited & Anr. (2022) INSC 1202 to determine that 10% of the monthly income should be added for a claimant in the relevant age bracket (56 years) even in injury cases.

Source reference: para 9
04

Reasoning

The Court found the Tribunal erred by excluding future prospects from the assessment of future loss of income. Given the appellant was 56 years old, the Court added 10% to his monthly notional income of Rs. 4,980/-, resulting in Rs. 5,478/-, and applied a multiplier of 9 and disability of 16% to arrive at Rs. 94,716/-.

Source reference: para 9

Regarding "actual loss of income," the Court determined that given the severity of the trimalleolar fracture and prolonged physiotherapy, the Tribunal's award for 2 months was insufficient; it was increased to 6 months.

Source reference: para 10

The Court observed that the length of medical treatment and the nature of injuries warranted doubling the compensation for "pain, shock, and suffering" (to Rs. 30,000/-) and "special diet, attendant charges and transportation" (to Rs. 20,000/-) to meet the standard of "just compensation".

Source reference: paras 11–12
05

Holding

The Court partly allowed the appeal, answering that the claimant was entitled to enhanced compensation.

The total compensation was increased from Rs. 1,76,257/- to Rs. 2,29,826/-, resulting in an additional award of Rs. 53,569/-, with the Insurance Company ordered to deposit the additional amount with 9% interest from the date of the claim petition till realization within six weeks.

Source reference: paras 14, 15–16
Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

RAMESHBHAI KALYANBHAI CHAUHANvsRAKESHKUMAR ISHWARLAL PATEL

Gujarat High Court · July 16, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment