IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 422 of 2022 With R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 147 of 2023 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 422 of 2022 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR ============================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No √

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

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Versus JAYDEEPSINH JAVANSINH GELOT RAJPUT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Defendant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2,3 ============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 03/12/2025

ORAL JUDGMENT

1) The appellant – original opponent no.3 – Shriram General insurance Co. Ltd., has filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "the Act") challenging the judgment and award dated 28.02.2020 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Palanpur, District - Banaskantha (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.161 of 2016.

2) The original claimant – respondent no.1 herein has objected the present appeal by filing cross objections being Cross Objection No.147 of 2023, on the ground that the learned Tribunal has committed error in considering the income, disability, PSS and also erred in not considering future prospect.

3) Heard Mr. R. P. Raval, learned Advocate for the appellant –

Insurance Company and Mr. K. K. Thakkar, learned Advocate for respondent no.1 – original claimant. The respondent nos.2 and 3 though duly served but did not appear before this Court.

Perused the record and proceedings.

4) It is the case of the original claimant that on 04.09.2014, the claimant was travelling to his home from Mumanvas on motorcycle bearing Reg. No.GJ-09-P-9337, and when reached in the sim of Mumanvas on Danta – Palanpur Highway Road, in the meanwhile, a Tavera car bearing Reg. No.GJ-01-HL-5608, came in excessive speed and dashed the motorcycle of the claimant. Due to which the claimant sustained severe injuries all over the body causing permanent disability making him incapacitated in performing his daily chores. Therefore, the claimant has filed MAC Petition seeking compensation. After appreciating the evidence produced on record the learned Tribunal was pleased to allow the claim petition.

5) Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed error in awarding compensation and considering the income of the claimant in absence of any proof. Further the learned Tribunal has awarded exorbitant compensation and assessed permanent disability at 90% of the whole body and committed error as per Workmen Compensation Act. Even the endorsement on the disability certificate is 35%

though the Tribunal has considered it as 80% disablement. So far ortho related injuries are concerned disability certificate was for 21.71% whereas endorsement was given for 9%, however, the learned Tribunal has considered 10% and in total of both the injuries was given 90% disablement which is against the settled principle of law and as per the Kessler’s Book two disabilities cannot be added. Hence, he has requested to allow the present appeal.

6) Learned Advocate for the respondent no.1 – original claimant has filed Cross Objections and submitted that the learned Tribunal has not properly considered the disability and 100% disability is required to be considered. The claimant has lost his 100% vision. Further he has submited that though the claimant having ITI Degree and working as Electrician and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month, his income is considered lower and at least income as per minimum wages rate is required to be considered. The Tribunal has not considered future prospective income at all which is required to be considered as 40% considering disablement of the claimant. Furth