IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1010 of 2022 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No √

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

RAVINDRA MADHUBHAI PARMAR Versus DIPAKSINH KALUSINH & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR MANAN K PANERI(7959) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 11/02/2026 ORAL JUDGMENT [1.0] By way of present First Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant – original claimant has assailed the impugned judgment and award dated 03.11.2021 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Ahmedabad (for short “learned Tribunal”) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.357/2013, whereby the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition in favor of the original claimant and awarded Rs.1,65,019/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition.

[2.0] The brief facts leading to filing of present appeal are as follows: [2.1] On 03.11.2012, the claimant was riding as a pillion rider on two wheeler bearing registration No.GJ-01-BE-8958 being driven by his colleague and while they were returning after delivering goods, at the place of accident, driver of Jeep bearing registration No.GJ-01-AP- 8130 came with full speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed the Scooty of the claimant on the front side as a result of which the claimant and driver of Scooty fell down on road and sustained serious injuries. Therefore, the original claimant filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.4 lakh.

[2.2] After considering the evidence produced on record by the respective parties, learned Tribunal has been pleased to hold the original opponent No.1 – driver of offending Jeep to be solely negligent for the accident. Hence, present First Appeal is filed by the appellant – original claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.

[3.0] Learned advocate Mr. Manan Paneri appearing for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed an error in granting meager compensation by not awarding compensation under the head of future prospective income by assigning reason that after the accident, income of claimant has increased. He has submitted that though the claimant sustained 23% disablement, which is proved vide document produced at Exh.89, the learned Tribunal has assessed the disablement of claimant only at 15% and relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajkumar vs. Ajaykumar & Ors. reported in (2011)1 SCC 343 learned Tribunal has refused to award just compensation. He has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pappu Deo Yadav vs. Naresh Kumar reported in (2022) 13 SCC 790 and requested to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation.

[4.0] Learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak appearing for the respondent No.3 – insurance company has opposed the First Appeal on the ground that there is no any future loss of earning caused to the claimant after the accident as the income of the claimant has increased and even witness in this regard is examined who has deposed that at the time of accident gross income of the claimant was only Rs.6815/- and subsequently, same has increased upto Rs.15,000/- in the year 2018 and even salary slip is also produced on record. Hence, there is no future loss of income caused to the claimant and learned Tribunal has not committed any error in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajkumar (Supra). She has further submitted that in view of there being no loss of income and increase in the income of claimant, the claimant is not entitled to get any addition i