LH OF DECD NILESHBHAI MAHENDRABHAI VASANTversusJIGAR BABUBHAI SHAH

    C/FA/1743/2022                              JUDGMENT DATED: 08/01/2026




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                     R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1743 of 2022

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
         Approved for Reporting              Yes   No
                                                    √
==========================================================
          LH OF DECD NILESHBHAI MAHENDRABHAI VASANT
                                Versus
                   JIGAR BABUBHAI SHAH & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                            Date : 08/01/2026
                            ORAL JUDGMENT

[1.0] This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has
been preferred by the appellants – original claimants against the
impugned judgment and award dated 06.05.2021 passed by the learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Ahmedabad (for short referred to
as “learned Tribunal”) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.524 of 2011
under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short referred to
as “MV Act”) wherein the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim
petition of appellants and awarded compensation of Rs.41,05,240/- with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim
petition.

[2.0] Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. Though
served, none appears for respondent No.1.

[3.0] The brief facts of the claim petition are that the accident took

                                 Page 1 of 6
    C/FA/1743/2022                               JUDGMENT DATED: 08/01/2026




place on 01.04.2011, when Nileshbhai Mahendrabhai Vasant (hereinafter
referred to as “deceased”) alongwiith his friend was going to Balotara for
watching Horse Fair in one car bearing registration No.GJ-01-HG-1200
driven by original opponent No.1 and when they were passing opposite
IOC, Siddhpur-Palanpur Highway road, at that time, one ST Bus came
from service road to main road due to which driver of car applied the
sudden brake and lost control over steering as a result of which the car
turned turtle and accident took place wherein the deceased sustained
serious multiple fractures on head and other injuries on various parts of
body. The deceased was taken to government hospital, Siddhpur, Patan
and treatment went on upto 03.06.2011 and thereafter, deceased died
on 28.02.2012 during his treatment at home. The appellants herein –
legal heirs and representatives of deceased filed the captioned claim
petition and learned Tribunal after appreciating the evidence awarded
aforesaid      compensation.   Being     aggrieved   with     quantum         of
compensation, the appellants herein have filed the present appeal for
enhancement of compensation.

[4.0] Learned advocate Mr. Vishal Mehta appearing for the appellants
has submitted that the learned Tribunal has materially erred in not
awarding the just and proper compensation considering the expenses
incurred by the deceased towards his treatment and under the head of
loss of consortium, the learned Tribunal has not awarded just
compensation considering the number of dependants of the deceased.
Learned Tribunal has committed an error in not considering medical bills
produced at Exhs.71 and 72 and learned Tribunal has ignored the
document produced at Exh.71 i.e. medical bills for an amount of
Rs.2,52,899/- and even towards attendant and transportation charges,
the learned Tribunal has erred in not awarding Rs.1,59,600/- though
receipts were produced on record. He has further submitted that the
learned Tribunal ought to have considered the medical expenses which


                                 Page 2 of 6
    C/FA/1743/2022                             JUDGMENT DATED: 08/01/2026




are incurred by one Shantaben Atmaramdas Patel Charitable Trust on
behalf of the deceased. He has further submitted that the deceased
remained in hospital as indoor patient for 64 days. Hence, he has
requested to allow the present appeal.


[5.0] Learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak appearing for the insurance
company has opposed the present appeal by submitting that the
learned Tribunal has properly appreciated the evidence and in absence
of any material or evidence question does not arise to enhance the
compensation. She has further submitted that the said Trust has
already paid the amount and even if said fact is accepted, the said
Trust has not claimed the amount spent by it towards medical
expenses of the deceased and therefore, once the claimants have
received the amount from the said Trust, in absence of any evidence,
the claimants owe the said amount to the said Trust and therefore,
question to consider the said request does not arise and the learned
Tribunal has properly ignored the evidence produced at Exhs.71 and
72. Hence, she has requested to dismiss the present appeal.

[6.0] In the present appeal issue of liability or negligence is not
challenged and appeal is filed on limited ground that the learned
Tribunal has ignored the expenditure towards medical bills produced at
Exhs.71 and 72 and therefore, present appeal is considered in narrow
compass.

[7.0] Having heard learned advocate appearing for the respective
parties and perusing the evidence on record, it appears that the learned
Tribunal has taken into consideration the fact that the deceased was
admitted in Sterling Hospital, Ahmedabad and expenditure sheet is
produced at Exh.70 which shows that total amount of Rs.16,27,865/- was
spent out of which Rs.1,00,000/- was reimbursed to the claimants by way


                                Page 3 of 6
    C/FA/1743/2022                              JUDGMENT DATED: 08/01/2026




of medical claim and Rs.10,86,415/- is paid by Shantaben Atmaramdas
Patel Charitable Trust and therefore, the claimants have paid
Rs.4,41,450/- and the learned Tribunal has considered the said amount
but it appears that the document produced at Exhs.71 and 72 are not
considered. The deceased came to be discharged from the Sterling
Hospital on 23.06.2011 and expenditure sheet produced at Exh.71
demonstrates that medical bills amounting to Rs.2,52,899/- are dated
23.06.2011 and thereafter and hence, the learned Tribunal has
committed an error in not considering the said bills. Therefore, the
claimants are entitled to an amount of Rs.2,52,899/- towards medical
bills. Further, the claimants have relied on Exh.72 for claiming
compensation under the head of attendant and transportation charges
but perusing the record it appears that some bills at Exh.72 are duplicate
and of overlapping dates of aforesaid time each of Rs.12,000/- and even
otherwise, under the head of pain, shock and suffering, the learned
Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,94,100/- and hence, this Court is not inclined
to accept the said document produced at Exh.72 as a gospel truth and as
it is. However, this Court deems it fit to award lumpsum amount of
Rs.50,000/- towards attendant and transporation charges. The
deceased was having four dependants and the learned Tribunal has
awarded only Rs.44,000/- towards loss of consortium however, in view of
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Shethi reported in (2017) 16
SCC 680, the claimants are entitled to get Rs.1,93,600/- (Rs.48,400 x
4) towards loss of consortium.

[8.0] So far as claim of claimants to award Rs.10,86,415/- which was paid
by Shantaben Atmaramdas Patel Charitable Trust on behalf of the
deceased is concerned, the said amount is to be paid to the said Trust
however, there is no evidence in this regard and even otherwise the
claimants owe the said amount to the said Trust and therefore, the


                                 Page 4 of 6
    C/FA/1743/2022                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 08/01/2026




claimants are not entitled to receive the said amount of Rs.10,86,415/-
more particularly in view of the fact that compensation under the MV Act
is not a bonanza or a jackpot and once expenses are incurred, original
claimants are not entitled to receive the said amount.

[9.0] Thus, now the appellants – original claimants are entitled to the
reassessed compensation as under:

                 Heads            Amount            Reassessed       by     this
                                  awarded         by Court
                                  the Tribunal
     Future loss of               Rs.33,92,640/-         Rs.33,92,640/-
     dependency
     Loss of consortium            Rs.44,000/-           Rs.1,93,600/-
                                                      including additional
                                                    amount of Rs.1,49,600/-
     Funeral Expenses              Rs.16,500/-             Rs.16,500/-
     Loss of Estate                Rs.16,500/-               Rs.16,500/-
     Medical Expenditure           Rs.4,41,500/-         Rs.6,94,399/-
                                               including additional
                                             amount of Rs.2,52,899/-
     Pain, shock and suffering Rs.1,94,100/-       Rs.1,94,100/-
     Attendant                &          ---                 Rs.50,000/-
     transportation charges
                         Total... Rs.41,05,240/-         Rs.45,57,739/-


      Thus, total compensation of Rs.45,57,739/- as awarded by the
learned Tribunal is on lower side, for the reasons recorded hereinabove,
and therefore, same is required to be reassessed and enhanced to the
aforesaid extent i.e. Rs.45,57,739/- and therefore, the impugned
judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified to the
aforesaid extent.


                                    Page 5 of 6
       C/FA/1743/2022                                                       JUDGMENT DATED: 08/01/2026




[10.0]            In wake of aforesaid conspectus, present First Appeal is
partly allowed. The respondents are hereby directed to deposit
reassessed amount of compensation of Rs.45,57,739/- alongwith
accrued interest thereon at the rate of 7.5% per annum, with the
learned Tribunal within a period of FOUR WEEKS from the date of
receipt of the present judgment. The Impugned judgment and award
dated 06.05.2021 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Main), Ahmedabad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.524 of 2011 is
modified to the aforesaid extent and rest of the impugned judgment
and award remains unaltered.

[10.1]            After the aforesaid amount of enhanced compensation is
deposited by the insurance company, learned Tribunal is directed to
disburse the entire amount with accrued interest thereon, if any, to
the original claimants, by account payee cheque / NEFT / RTGS, after
proper verification and after following due procedure.

[10.2]            While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the
courts fees, if not paid.

[11.0]            Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the
concerned Tribunal, forthwith.


                                                                                          Sd/-
                                                                        (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
 Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/01/2026 15:42:21




                                                   Page 6 of 6