IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 129 of 2012 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 687 of 2012 ==========================================================

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Versus IBRAHIM ILIAS CHAVDA (KHALIFA) & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR RUSHANG MEHTA for MR DAKSHESH MEHTA(2430) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR HENIL M SHAH(10677) for the Defendant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2,3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 10/01/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. The present First Appeals, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, are preferred by the insurance company and claimant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 18.10.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kachchh – Bhuj in Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos.472 of 2005.

2. That on 8th December, 2004, at around 13:00 hours, the claimant was standing near the place of accident alongwith Shri Mahmadhanif Mahmadhusen Khalifa, Ramiz Razak Lodia and one another boy. The claimant and other persons were standing in the side of the road and waiting for vehicle to go to Village Sukhpar, to attend the marriage function. At that time, the Tata Tempo bearing registration No. GJ-5-T-2312 came from Bhuj city side. The opponent No.1 was driving the said tempo and he was driving the vehicle rashly, recklessly, negligently and at an excessive speed, without observing the rules of the road and without caring for the safety of the other users. The opponent No.1 lost control over the vehicle and came on wrong side of the road and dashed and collided with the claimant, Ramiz Razak Lodia and the boy. After the accident, the vehicle was turned turtle and the claimant and other two persons have sustained injuries. As per the say of the claimant, the claimant has become permanently and totally disabled because of the injuries sustained by him in the alleged accident, which took place because of the rash and negligent driving of the opponent No.1.

2.1 For reduction of the compensation, the insurance company has filed First Appeal No.129 of 2012 and for enhancement of compensation, the claimant has filed First Appeal No.687 of

2012.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Rushang Mehta appearing for the insurance company would submit that the learned Tribunal has taken up the income of the claimant on higher side.

4. The appeal of the claimant is only on the ground that the Tribunal has committed an error in not properly calculating the amount of compensation. He has submitted that amount of award is on lower side as the Tribunal has not properly considered the various aspects; like pain, shock and suffering, transportation, special diet, medical expenses etc. Even, the loss of future prospect has not been awarded to the claimant.

Therefore, the compensation is required to be enhanced.

5. Apt to note that the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is a beneficial piece of Legislation. The concept of just and fair compensation is integral and seminal to the MV Act. The compensation to be awarded under the principle of just and fair compensation to the injured of the road accident or the legal representative/s of the deceased person is based on the principle of fairness, reasonableness and equability. Anguish of the heart or for mental turbulence being consequential result of the road accident cannot be actually compensated, but the quint essentiality lies in adopting holistic and pragmatic view to the computation of the compensation for the loss sustained, which is to be in the realm of realistic approximation. Although exact or perfect arithmetical calculation of compensation for reparation of the loss arrived from the road accident is almost impossible. The Tribunal is bestowed with duty to make an endevour to award just compensation regardless of the amount claimed by the claimant. The determination of the quantum of compensation therefore, must be liberal a