IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2041 of 2022 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

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

MANHARBHAI SOMABHAI PATEL Versus KALPESHKUMAR MULAJIBHAI DARJI & ANR.

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

Appearance:

NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 PRITHU PARIMAL(9025) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2 ============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 20/02/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1) Present First Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) is filed by the appellant – original claimant challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 11.10.2018 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Panchmahals at Godhra (for short “learned Tribunal”) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.727 of 2010, whereby the learned Tribunal was pleased to partly allow the claim petition and awarded compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- to the appellant –

original claimant.

2) The brief facts leading to filing of present appeal are that on

03.04.2010, the appellant – claimant along with one Ketankumar were going on motorcycle bearing Reg. No.GJ-20-H-985, and at that time the appellant was riding the motorcycle. When they were passing near Rebari Village on Dahod Godhra Highway, at that point of time the opponent no.1 came driven his ST Bus bearing Reg. No.GJ-18-Y-227, in rash and negligent manner and dashed with one Tempo from behind, thereafter, came extremely wrong side and dashed with the motorcycle of the appellant, resulting appellant sustained very serious injuries with fracture. The complaint being I-C. R. No.49 of 2010 came to be registered with Dev Baria Police Station against the opponent no.1. Therefore, the original claimant filed MAC Petition No.727 of 2010 seeking compensation of Rs.10 lakh. After considering the evidence produced and adduced, the learned Tribunal held the opponent no.1 - driver of ST Bus solely negligent for the accident and was pleased to award Rs.4,50,000/- to the original claimant. However, being aggrieved with the quantum of compensation, present First Appeal is filed by the appellant –

original claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.

3) Learned Advocate Mr. N. A. Bhalodi, appearing for the appellant – original claimant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed an error in not awarding any compensation under the head of future loss of income merely on the ground that the claimant was in permanent job and his salary increased despite of the injuries sustained by the appellant and further, there is no functional disablement and hence, without applying any multiplier, under the head of loss of amenities, a lump-sum compensation is awarded which is meager as the claimant has sustained crush injury to the right foot and treated by means of above knee amputation having stump length of 12 inches long from anterior superior iliac spine having 75% partial permanent disability of lower limb. Even, the learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards actual loss of income though the claimant remained on leave for a period of six months. Hence, he has requested to allow the present appeal.

4) Learned advocate Mr. Prithu Parimal, appearing for the respondent No.2 – Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (which shall hereinafter be referred to as “Corporation”), has submitted that the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in passing the impugned judgment and award more particularly in view of the fact that the after the accident, there is no loss of income to the appellant and day by day the income of the appellant has increased and in this regard, he has relied on the decision in the case of Rajkumar vs. Ajaykumar & Ors. reported in (2011)1 SCC 343. Hence, he has requested to dismiss the first appeal.

5) Since the only issue raised in the present app