IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1127 of 2025 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No ============================================

UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Versus MANJULABEN KANUBHAI PATEL & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR DHVALKUMAR R PRAJAPATI(12251) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2 NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 3 ============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 02/03/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 22.10.2024 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Ahmedabad (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.174 of 2016, the appellant – original opponent no.2 – Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (which shall hereinafter be referred to as “Corporation” for short) has preferred the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "the Act" for short).

2) Heard learned Advocate Mr. D. R. Prajapati, for the appellant –

original opponent no.2 and learned Advocate Mr. H. M. Modi, for respondent nos.1 and 2 – original claimants. Perused the original record and proceedings.

3) It is the case of the original claimants that the deceased Swapnil Kanubhai Patel, (who shall hereinafter be referred to as “deceased”) had gone to Sikkim – Gangtok for the purpose of training as a part of practical training of his Architecture Engineering course. About seven days prior to the incident he had started his journey from Sikkim to Gujarat via Delhi on motorcycle bearing Reg. No.GJ-07-BS-4014. On 16.11.2015, while the deceased was driving the above mentioned motorcycle and was proceeding towards Mathura from Bharatpur and reached near IOCL Depot Petrol Pump, in the mean time at about 01:50 pm bus of Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation bearing Reg. No.UP-85-AT-0652, came driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner from Mathura said and dashed with the motorcycle of the deceased. Due to which the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to it. Therefore, the appellants had filed MAC Petition seeking compensation, wherein, the learned Tribunal after appreciating the evidence produced on record has partly allowed the claim petition.

4) Learned Advocate for the appellant has argued that the learned Tribunal has committed error in determining the liability of the appellant and excessive compensation is granted. He has further argued that despite there was head on collision between the bus and motorcycle the learned Tribunal has not considered contributory negligence on the part of the deceased which is erroneous. He has further argued that the deceased was bachelor Architect in absence of any evidence the income of Rs.20,000/- is considered. Further the dependency is considered 1/3 instead of ½ as the deceased was bachelor and respondent no.3 is the sister of deceased and she attained majority and hence she is not entitled for dependency loss and hence requested to allow the present appeal.

5) Learned Advocate for the respondent - original claimants has opposed the present appeal and submitted that the Tribunal has properly appreciated the evidence produced on record and rightly awarded the compensation. Hence, he has requested to dismiss the present appeal.

6) Having heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and going through the record it appears that the learned Tribunal has considered the evidence on record and relied on the judgment in the cases of Bimla Devi Vs. H.R.T.C, reported in AIR 2009 SC 2819, and Parmeshwari Devi Vs. Amir Chand, reported in 2011 (11) SCC 635, and appreciated the evidence based on preponderance of probabilities. The cla