IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2462 of 2010 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE) NO. 1 of 2023 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2462 of 2010 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI ==========================================================

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

DHANRAJBHAI KHUMABHAI RABARI LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED &

ORS.

Versus RAMESHBHAI AMTHABHAI PATEL & ORS.

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

Appearance:

DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/ REPRESTENTATIVES for the Appellant(s) No. 1 KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3 MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI Date : 11/02/2026

JUDGMENT

1. Captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 16.02.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Patan in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.294 of 2004, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.7,49,000/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal is that on 08.08.2004, the original claimant/appellant was travelling in a jeep bearing registration No.GJ-16-C-2536 and when he reached place near the petrol pump of Village Ranakpur, in the meantime the respondent No.1- driver of the offending vehicle started to drive the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and resultantly the said vehicle turned turtle. In the said accident, the original claimant/appellant sustained grievous injuries. Resultantly, he became complete paraplegic and bed ridden. It has been further averred that at the time of accident, the original claimant/appellant was aged about 26 years and he was gainfully engaged in masonary work as well as agricultural work and thereby earning a sum of Rs.65,000/- per annum. Therefore, the claim petition for seeking the compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- was filed. Initially, the claim petition came to be filed under Section 163-A for seeking the compensation of Rs.14,12,000/- but thereafter the claim petition came to be amended and it was converted under Section 166 of the M. V. Act for seeking the compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-.

3. Having been served with the notices of the claim petition, respondent No.3-Insurance Company had filed the written statement at Exh-50 thereby denying the averments made in the claim petition. It has been further averred that another vehicle i.e. truck involved in the accident has not been impleaded in the claim petition. In brief, the respondent No.3-Insurance Company prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

4. In order to prove his claim, the original claimant/appellant-herein has led following oral as well as documentary evidence:-

5. Having considered the pleadings, evidence and submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties, the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.7,49,000/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization.

6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the original claimant/appellant had challenged the impugned judgment and award on the ground of quantum.

7. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

8. Mr. Kaash K. Thakkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant/appellants-herein, vehemently submitted that at the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 27 years. The learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant as Rs.2,800/- per month, but has not considered the prospective i