Modification of Judgment dtd. 03/02/2026 in R/FA/2641/2022

0.624989249985697 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2641 of 2022 [On note for speaking to minutes of order dated 03/02/2026 in R/FA/2641/2022 ]

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

DAKSHABEN MAGANBHAI JETHVA WD/O DECD MAGANBHAI GOPALJI JETHVA & ORS.

Versus OM PRAKASH NIRMAL YADAV & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 3 RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 13/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel for the appellants does not press Speaking to Minutes filed in the captioned appeal. Judgment dated 03.02.2026 passed by this Court in the captioned appeal remains unaltered.

Note stands disposed of accordingly.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)

SUCHIT R/FA/2641/2022

0.624989249985697 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2641 of 2022 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

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

DAKSHABEN MAGANBHAI JETHVA WD/O DECD MAGANBHAI GOPALJI JETHVA & ORS.

Versus OM PRAKASH NIRMAL YADAV & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 3 RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

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

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 09.09.2020 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Bhuj, (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.222/2003, the appellants –original claimants preferred present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short).

2. Heard Mr. Hemal Shah, learned Advocate for the appellants – original Claimants. Though served, none appears for the respondents.

3. It is the case of the claimants that on 24.06.2002, the deceased along with other persons were going to Gandhinagar in Maruti Car bearing No.GJ- 12-P-1203 which was driving by Vinod Manilal Veghad on the left side of the road and when they reached near Nani Chirai village, at that time, one Truck bearing No.MH-04-AL-5393 came from opposite direction in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the Maruti car of the deceased. As a result, the deceased got serious injuries and succumbed to it. Therefore, the R/FA/2641/2022

0.624989249985697 claim petition was filed by the legal heirs of the deceased to get compensation of Rs.70,00,000/- from the opponents. After appreciating the evidence produced on record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.10,68,200/- along with cost and interest @ 9 % p.a.

4. The appeal is filed on limited ground of quantum and no further issue qua liability or contributory negligence is challenged. Therefore, learned counsel for the claimant has mainly argued that, the Tribunal has erred in considering average income of the deceased as Rs.82,270/- per annum though the income tax returns are filed and claimants having sufficient proof of income of the deceased, however, the Tribunal has discarded such documentary evidence and without assigning any reason, assessed his annual income as Rs.82,270/- based on last income tax returns. It is also submitted that the deceased was partner in one Hotel Payal at Anjar and was earning Rs.25,000/- per annum. He was also serving as a Manager in Shivam Traders and getting salary of Rs.1,17,000/- per annum and also doing agriculture work and brokerage work. Thereby, the deceased was having three sources of income and his