ARVINDBHAI SOMABHAI ROHITversusKANABHAI HIRABHAI PAGI

     C/FA/4272/2025                                 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/01/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4272 of 2025

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

==========================================================

             Approved for Reporting                 Yes          No

==========================================================
                ARVINDBHAI SOMABHAI ROHIT & ORS.
                               Versus
                   KANABHAI HIRABHAI PAGI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHSIN M HAKIM(5396) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                              Date : 23/01/2026

                              ORAL JUDGMENT

1.     Feeling aggrieved by and dissatis8ed with the judgment and award
dated 13.09.2023 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.),
Vadodara, (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor
Accident Claim Petition No.684/2018, the appellants –original claimants
preferred present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
(hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short).

2.     Heard Mr. Mohsin Hakim learned Advocate for the appellants –
original Claimants and Mr. H.G. Mazmudar, learned counsel for respondent
No.3. Though served, none appears for rest of the respondents.




                                   Page 1 of 5
     C/FA/4272/2025                               JUDGMENT DATED: 23/01/2026




3.     It is the case of the claimants that on 09.10.2018, while the deceased
Gaurangkumar Arvindbhai Rohit was going on Motorcycle towards his
company for attending his duty in night shift and when he reached near the
place of accident, at that time, one Luxury Bus bearing No.GJ-06-AX-7699
came in full speed and in rash and negligent manner and dashed the
motorcycle from behind. As a result, the deceased got serious injuries and
succumbed to it during treatment in the hospital. Therefore, the claim
petition was 8led by the legal heir of the deceased to get compensation of
Rs.21,00,000/- from the opponents. After appreciating the evidence
produced on record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation of
Rs.15,89,000/- along with cost and interest @ 9 % p.a.

4.     The appeal is 8led on limited ground of quantum and no further issue
qua liability or contributory negligence is challenged. Therefore, learned
counsel for the claimant has mainly argued that, the Tribunal has erred in
considering monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- as he was
Diploma in Mechanical Engineer and serving in SeLer India Ltd. and earning
Rs.15,000/- p.m. Further, he has relied on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court
of India in case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi,
reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680, and contended that the Tribunal has erred
in awarding compensation under the conventional heads as Rs.77,000/- and
as per the said judgment, the Tribunal ought to have enhanced the same.
Hence, he has prayed to allow the appeal as prayed for.

5.     Learned counsel for the respondent No.3- Insurance Company has
opposed the present appeal and submitted that, the Tribunal has rightly
awarded compensation and adequate compensation is awarded under the
head of loss of consortium. Therefore, requested to dismiss the appeal.

6.     Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the
parties, it appears that the appeal is 8led only on the aspect of quantum and
liability is not challenged. The Insurance Company has not 8led any cross-
objection. Hence, this appeal is required to be decided on the aspect of


                                  Page 2 of 5
     C/FA/4272/2025                                JUDGMENT DATED: 23/01/2026




quantum only. Alleged incident is not not in dispute. Involvement of the
vehicle is also not in dispute. In order to prove the claim, evidence has been
produced on record like deposition of claimant No.1 at Exh:12 and
deposition of witness Amarjitsingh Benipal at Exh:23. FIR at Exh:14,
Panchnama of scene of incident at Exh:16, Copy of appointment letter at
Exh:24 and copy of certi8cate issued by GTU at Exh:20. Pursuant to the
evidence produced on record, it appears that as per the case of the
claimants, deceased was 20 years and was serving as a trainee in FAG
Company under the contract of Team Lease Skills University since
December, 2017 and was earning Rs.10531/- and thereafter, the deceased
was working as a trainee in FAG company under the contract of Care Works
Foundation since 01.10.2018 and was getting salary of Rs.13,500/- p.m. Over
and above the same, he was also doing part time work and thus getting total
salary of Rs.15,000/-. Deceased had received salary of Rs.15,075/- in August,
2018 and entry regarding salary had been made in the bank passbook.

7.     Considering the aforesaid facts and evidence produced on record,
this Court is of considered view that there was no reason to discard such
documentary evidence produced on record. Not only that, the Tribunal came
to the conclusion that amount of salary has been deposited in the bank
account which clearly reOected from Pass-Book. Though, the Tribunal has
believed that the deceased was diploma engineer and having bright career,
considered his notional income as Rs.10,000/- p.m. Once the Tribunal has
accepted the documentary evidence as well as the fact that the deceased
was engineer and bright future, there was no reason to reduce the income
at Rs.10,000/-. Therefore, the income is required to be reassessed as
Rs.15,000/-.

8.     Further, the Tribunal has rightly considered future prospective
income of the deceased as 40 %. As the deceased was unmarried, 1/2
deduction as personal expenditure and living of the deceased and multiplier
of 18 were considered by the learned Tribunal as per the judgment of the



                                  Page 3 of 5
      C/FA/4272/2025                                JUDGMENT DATED: 23/01/2026




Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation & Anr. [2009 (6) SCC 121] are just and proper.

9.      Therefore, calculating the income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/- and
future prospect of 40% = Rs.6,000/- which comes to Rs.21,000/- and 1/2nd
amount is required to be deducted as personal expenditure and living of the
deceased which comes to Rs.10,500/- and the net amount comes to
Rs.10,500/-. In view of above, the amount under the head of loss of future
dependency is required to be reassessed as Rs.10,500/- x 12 months x 18
multiplier = Rs.22,68,000/-. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to get
additional amount of Rs.7,56,000/- under the head of future loss of
dependency.

10.     Further, the Tribunal by relying on the judgment of Pranay Sethi
(supra) has awarded total Rs.77,000/- under the conventional heads.
However, this Court is of the view that amount is required to be awarded as
Rs.18,150/- towards loss of estate and Rs.18,150/- towards funeral
expenses.

11.     Further, in view of ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Nanu Ram, reported in
(2018) 18 SCC 130 and Janabai Wd/o Dinkarrao Ghorpade & Ors., Vs M/s
ICICI Lambord Insurance Company Ltd., reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC)
666, the amount towards loss of consortium is reassessed as Rs.96,800/- for
two dependents (Rs.48,400/- for each dependent).

12.     As discussed above, the appellants – original claimants are entitled to
get compensation computed as under:-
                 Heads           Awarded by         Reassessed by this Court
                                 the Tribunal
     Future loss of dependency   15,12,000/-             Rs.22,68,000/-
     Conventional heads            77,000/-              Rs.1,33,100/-
                                                 (Rs.18,150/- under loss of
                                                 estate,    Rs.18,150/- under


                                   Page 4 of 5
       C/FA/4272/2025                                                      JUDGMENT DATED: 23/01/2026




                                                                     funeral     expenses                      and
                                                                     Rs.96800/-   for   loss                    of
                                                                     consortium)

     Total compensation                         15,89,000/-                       Rs.24,01,100/-


 13.       As Rs.15,89,000/- is already awarded by learned Tribunal, the
 appellants – original claimants are entitled to get additional amount of
 Rs.8,12,100/- (Rs.24,01,100 – Rs.15,89,000/-) with proportionate costs and
 interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal.

 14.       Hence, present appeal is partly allowed. The judgment and award
 dated 13.09.2023 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.),
 Vadodara, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.684/2018 stands modi8ed to
 the aforesaid extent. Rest of the judgment and award remains unaltered. It
 is provided that respondent No.3 shall deposit such additional amount of
 Rs.8,12,100/- along with interest as awarded by the Tribunal, before the
 Tribunal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this
 order. Record and proceedings be remitted back to the concerned Tribunal
 forthwith.

 15.       The Tribunal is directed to recover or deduct the de8cit court fees on
 enhanced amount and thereafter disburse the amount accordingly. Award
 to be drawn accordingly.




                                                                           (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)

 SUCHIT

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 23/01/2026 16:41:14




                                                   Page 5 of 5