Gujarat High Court
Rupsing Saburbhai Patel vs Abdul Razak Ismailbhai Mansuri on 22 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2073 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
RUPSING SABURBHAI PATEL
Versus
ABDUL RAZAK ISMAILBHAI MANSURI & ORS.
========================================================
Appearance:
MR. AMIT C. NANAVATI FOR MR UM SHASTRI(830) for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
MR. M.R. PRAJAPATI FOR MR VC THOMAS(5476) for the Defendant(s)
No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 22/04/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
[1.] Heard Mr. Amit C. Nanavati, learned advocate appearing for Mr. U.M. Shastri, learned advocate on record for the appellant- original claimant and learned advocate Mr. M.R. Prajapati for Mr. V.C. Thomas, learned advocate for the respondent no.3-The Oriental Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter to be referred as "Insurance Page 1 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined Company").
[2.] Despite service of notice of admission of appeal on respondent nos.1 and 2, namely the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle, they have chosen not to enter any appearance or object to the present appeal. With the able assistance of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the appeal is finally heard.
[3.] The present appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act of 1988"), at the instance of the original claimant- appellant herein, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 01.04.2015 (hereinafter to be referred as "the impugned judgment and award") passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Dahod in M.A.C.P. No.651 of 2005. By the said impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the original claimant under Section 166 of the Act of 1988, holding him entitled to recover sum of Rs.1,83,622/- from the original opponents, jointly and severally, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, till its actual realization. Hence, the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation to the tune of Rs.1,89,378/- with Page 2 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined interest and costs.
[4.] Considering the grounds raised in the appeal and the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant, this Court, vide order dated 23.02.2016, has admitted the appeal. The record & proceedings has been called for.
[5.] At the outset, learned advocate appearing for the appellant, has fairly submitted that he is not challenging the future loss of income being denied by the Tribunal, in the facts of the case; however, the Tribunal has erroneously computed the income for the purpose of determination of actual of loss of income. Learned advocate for the appellant has vehemently assailed the impugned judgment and award on the ground that the Tribunal committed grave error in deducting the amount reflected under the head of deduction towards insurance and undisclosed heads in the salary slip produced on record at Exh.47. According to learned advocate, except for the amount paid towards tax being shown under the head of deduction, the rest of the amount towards insurance and undisclosed deduction was required to be added towards salary of the claimant for the purpose of determination of actual loss of income. He has, therefore, urged this Court to treat the income of the claimant as Rs.6,077/- per month, instead of Rs.4,477/-.
Page 3 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined [5.1] It is further submitted that the injury certificate and the
disability certificate have been produced on record, which clearly suggest that the claimant had undergone operation for fractures sustained in the L2-L3 vertebrae as well as the left inferior pubic ramus. With such injuries sustained by the claimant, upon his physical and clinical examination, the doctor had issued the disability certificate which is produced on record at Exh.60. The doctor who has opined that the claimant has sustained 35% disability of the body as a whole. The attention of this Court was invited to the fact that, in fact, he was operated for the aforesaid treatment of fracture, and plates and screws were also inserted, as evident from the aforesaid disability certificate produced on record at Exh.60.
[5.2] Learned advocate has, therefore, submitted that the Tribunal committed error in confining the amount of compensation under the head of pain, shock, and suffering as Rs.7,500/-. Considering the nature of the injuries sustained, at least, the Tribunal ought to have awarded sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards pain, shock, and suffering. [5.3] Learned advocate has placed reliance upon the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Pratapsinh Gemalsinh Sisodiya Versus Varsanbhai Chhitubhai Nayak Deleted & Ors. reported in 2024 (0) AIJEL-HC 249071, to contend that in such Page 4 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined kinds of disability, the Court can always consider awarding appropriate compensation for the loss of amenities of life in order to meet with the object of just and proper amount of compensation. He has, therefore, urged this Court to award Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities, considering the facts of the case and the evidence brought on record.
[5.4] Learned advocate has also urged this Court to reconsider the amount of compensation awarded under the heads of special diet, attendant charges, and transportation charges. He has fairly submitted that the Tribunal has rightly awarded amount of compensation under the head of medical expenses. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to allow the appeal and to enhance the amount of compensation with interest and proportionate costs. [6.] Learned advocate Mr. M.R. Prajapati appearing for respondent no. 3- Insurance Company, has objected to the aforesaid submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellant. Learned advocate has mainly relied upon the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal on the issue of quantum of compensation. It is submitted that though the disability certificate suggests that the claimant has sustained 35% disability of the body as a whole, the advocates on Page 5 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined record have agreed to consider the disability as 16% of the body as a whole, instead of 35%. It is further submitted that the claimant was a constable at the time of the accident and subsequently he was promoted to the post of head constable, as evident from the cross- examination of the claimant. It has also transpired that the claimant has produced a fitness certificate before the concerned department. It is in these peculiar facts of the case and the evidence emerged on record, the Tribunal has rightly refused to consider his case for future loss of income. In such circumstances, this Court may not accept the prayer for compensation sought for under the head of loss of amenities.
[6.1] As regards the submission made by the learned advocate for the appellant for enhancement under the head of actual loss of income is concerned, learned advocate has referred to and relied upon the salary slip produced on record and, has submitted that, considering the deduction made, the Tribunal has rightly treated the net income of the claimant Rs.4,477/- for the purpose of determination of actual loss of income for three months. He has, therefore, objected to any enhancement under the aforesaid head. [6.2] As regards the enhancement sought for under the head of pain, shock, and suffering and special diet, attendant charges, and Page 6 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined transportation expenses are concerned, considering the nature of injuries sustained and the evidence on record, the aforesaid amount is just and proper. Learned advocate has, therefore, objected to the present appeal.
[7.] I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and have also carefully considered the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal. I have re-appreciated the evidence on record, in light of the arguments advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. [8.] The short question, which arises for consideration of this Court in the present appeal is, as to whether the Tribunal committed any error in determining the compensation of Rs.1,83,622/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition, till its actual realization from the original opponents, jointly and severally, while adjudicating the claim petition preferred by the original claimant under Section 166 of the Act of 1988, in the facts of the case and the evidence brought on record?
[9.] At the outset, it is required to be noted that the claimant was a constable at the time of the accident and, as transpired in the cross-examination, he has continued in his services with the Page 7 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined department. He has also admitted that he has been promoted to head constable. He has also admitted that at the time of the accident, his basic salary was Rs. 3,540/-, which has been raised to Rs. 10,500/- as on the date, when he was cross-examined. With such evidence on record, in absence of any challenge being made with regard to future loss of income, this Court is called upon to reconsider the income of the claimant for the purpose of assessment of actual loss of income, which, according to the learned advocate for the claimant, has been determined on the lower side. Learned advocate has emphasized on the fact that, even on bare appreciation of the salary slip produced on record, the only component, which was required to be ignored by the Tribunal, was the amount paid towards the tax.
[10.] In my view, the Tribunal committed error in considering the deduction of other amounts, which were indisputably towards the insurance premiums and other miscellaneous deductions. The courts have time and again reiterated the principles that, while considering the future loss of income, the courts are expected to take into consideration the component of "actual salary less tax". Considering the aforesaid principles in the facts of the case, and having appreciated the salary slip produced on record at Exh.47, the only amount, which was required to be ignored, was the amount paid Page 8 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined towards tax, which is Rs.40/-. Considering the deduction of the aforesaid amount from the gross salary of Rs. 6,117/-, the actual salary less tax, which was required to be considered, was Rs.6,077/- instead of Rs. 4,477/-. Considering the injury certificate produced on record and the other relevant medical case papers, the Tribunal has rightly considered the actual loss of income for a period of three months. Thus, the actual loss of income for the period of three months is re-determined as Rs. 18,231/- ( Rs.6,077 x 3 ). [11.] As regards the enhancement sought for under the head of pain, shock, and suffering is concerned, I have carefully considered the medical case papers produced on record, more particularly, the injury certificate produced on record at Exh.53, which suggests that the claimant had suffered paralysis of the right lower limb, when he was admitted in the hospital. On further examination, the medical officer had noted that he had also suffered fractures of the L2-L3 vertebrae and the left inferior pubic ramus. Noticing the aforesaid nature of the injuries, the recovery period of around three months was suggested. The claimant was, thereafter, immediately referred to a higher center for further treatment. As evident from the disability certificate produced on record, in light of the deposition of the claimant recorded at Exh.58, it is evident that the claimant was operated for Page 9 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined the aforesaid injuries. In fact, the disability certificate refers to the X- ray report, which indicates the presence of plates and screws. Noticing the aforesaid nature of the injuries sustained and the claimant having undergone operation, in my view, the Tribunal has awarded the amount on the lower side. Considering the nature of the injuries sustained, this Court is inclined to accept the prayer for amount of Rs. 25,000/- under the head of pain, suffering, and hardship caused to the claimant.
[12.] As regards the loss of amenities is concerned, it is required to be noted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Raj Kumar vs Ajay Kumar & Anr reported in (2011) 1 SCC 343, in paras 12 and 13, has laid down three guiding steps to be taken into consideration for the ascertainment of the effect of permanent disability on the actual earning capacity of the victim of the accident. It would be appropriate to revisit the relevant observations made by the Supreme Court in this regard, which read thus:
"12. Therefore, the Tribunal has to first decide whether there is any permanent disability and if so the extent of such permanent disability. This means that the tribunal should consider and decide with reference to the evidence:
(i) whether the disablement is permanent or temporary;
(ii) if the disablement is permanent, whether it is permanent total Page 10 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined disablement or permanent partial disablement,
(iii) if the disablement percentage is expressed with reference to any specific limb, then the effect of such disablement of the limb on the functioning of the entire body, that is the permanent disability suffered by the person.
If the Tribunal concludes that there is no permanent disability then there is no question of proceeding further and determining the loss of future earning capacity. But if the Tribunal concludes that there is permanent disability then it will proceed to ascertain its extent. After the Tribunal ascertains the actual extent of permanent disability of the claimant based on the medical evidence, it has to determine whether such permanent disability has affected or will affect his earning capacity.
13. Ascertainment of the effect of the permanent disability on the actual earning capacity involves three steps. The Tribunal has to first ascertain what activities the claimant could carry on in spite of the permanent disability and what he could not do as a result of the permanent ability (this is also relevant for awarding compensation under the head of loss of amenities of life). The second step is to ascertain his avocation, profession and nature of work before the accident, as also his age. The third step is to find out whether (i) the claimant is totally disabled from earning any kind of livelihood, or (ii) whether in spite of the permanent disability, the claimant could still effectively carry on the activities and functions, which he was earlier carrying on, or (iii) whether he was prevented or restricted from discharging his previous activities and functions, but could carry on some other or lesser scale of activities and functions so that he continues to earn or can continue to earn his livelihood."
Page 11 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined [13.] The Court has, at the same time, explained with various
illustrations and has emphasized on the functional disability of the body, to be taken into consideration while assessing the loss of earning capacity. The Court has also considered the loss of amenities in the case of a government employee, who has still continued in the service and has not suffered any actual loss of income. The Court has observed that there may not be any need to award any compensation under the head of loss of future earnings, if the claimant continues in government service; however, at the same time, the Court has held that he may be awarded compensation under the head of loss of amenities, as a consequence of the loss of a vital part of the body. [14.] Considering the aforesaid observations made by the Supreme Court, in light of the disability sustained by the claimant, though the Tribunal has refused to consider his case for future loss of income; however, at the same time, considering the nature of the duties attached to the post of constable and having sustained the injury in the vertebrae where he has been operated and plates and screws being inserted, the case of the claimant can be accepted for the purpose of awarding reasonable amount under the head of loss of amenities. Considering the fact that the claimant was aged 37 years at the time of the accident and considering the longevity of his life, this Page 12 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined Court is inclined to accept the case of the claimant for amount of Rs. 20,000/- towards the loss of amenities.
[15.] As regards the amount of compensation under the heads of special diet, attendant charges, and transportation expenses are concerned, considering the nature of the injuries sustained and the period of hospitalization as well as the extended period of medical treatment of three months, it would be appropriate to award Rs. 25,000/- towards the same.
[16.] In view of the above discussion, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal by the impugned judgment and award is re-appreciated and is re-determined. The same is reproduced in tabular form hereunder:
Under the Head of Compensation Compensation
awarded by the Awarded by this
Tribunal in Rs. Court in Rs.
Pain, Shock and Sufferings 7500/- 25,000/-
Actual loss of income 13,431/- 18,231/-
Medical Expenses 1,50,691/- 1,50,691/-
Special Diet, Attendant and 12,000/- 25,000/-
Transportation Charges
Loss of Amenities NIL 20,000/-
Total 1,83,622/- 2,38,922/-
Enhanced Amount 55,300/-
(Rs.2,38,922 - Rs.1,83,622)
Interest 7.5%
Page 13 of 15
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026
undefined
[17.] Thus, the claimant is hereby held entitled to recover the
total amount of compensation of Rs.2,38,922/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, till its actual realization with proportionate costs. [18.] For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 01.04.2015 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Dahod in M.A.C.P. No.651 of 2005, is hereby modified by holding the original claimant entitled to the total amount of compensation of Rs.2,38,922/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, till its actual realization, with proportionate costs from the original opponents-respondent herein, jointly and severally. Since, by the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has held the applicant entitled to amount of compensation of Rs.1,83,622/- with proportionate costs and interest, the respondent- Insurance Company is hereby directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 55,300/- with interest and costs as awarded by this Court, within a period of Six Weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
[19.] On deposit of the entire aforesaid amount of compensation, the Tribunal shall be at liberty to proceed with the Page 14 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2073/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined release and disbursement of the entire award amount in favour of the appellant herein. The Tribunal shall be at liberty to disburse the amount by passing appropriate orders of disbursement in favour of the claimant. The Tribunal shall also duly verify the identity of the claimant and shall adhere to the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard. While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the Court Fees, if not paid, in accordance with prevailing Rule. Let the aforesaid exercise be undertaken by the Tribunal within a period of Two Weeks from the date of deposit of the award amount. [20.] With these observations, the First Appeal stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms. Record and proceedings, if any, are directed to be sent back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith along with the Writ of this judgment.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA Page 15 of 15 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 04:09:31 IST 2026