Partly allowed

Madinabibi Nashirkhan Makrani v. Mahemood Ishak Madari

Gujarat HC14 Dec 2022FA/4231/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a crash that caused permanent disability to the claimant, a housewife. The High Court found the Tribunal's award inadequate and granted enhanced compensation including future loss of income, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other heads, totaling Rs 64,400, to be deposited with interest.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is partly allowed; the award is amended to grant Rs 64,400 total with 7.5% p.a. interest, to be deposited by respondents within eight weeks.

Madinabibi Nashirkhan Makrani Vs Mahemood Ishak Madari — Motor Accident Claims | Gujarat HC (2022)

¶1

C/FA/4231/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4231 of 2018

¶4

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

¶5

HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

¶6

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

¶7

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

¶8

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶9

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?

¶10

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ?

¶11

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

¶12

MADINABIBI NASHIRKHAN MAKRANI

¶13

Versus

¶14

MAHEMOOD ISHAK MADARI & 2 other(s)

¶15

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

¶16

Appearance:

¶17

MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR ANAL S SHAH(3988) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

¶20

Date : 14/12/2022

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

Challenge is given to the judgment and award dated 19.1.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) at Panchmahal at Godhra in claim case No. 2054 of

¶23

Page 1 of 4

¶24

C/FA/4231/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

¶25

1997.

¶26

Learned advocate Mr. Hemal Shah for the appellant submitted that the claimant and others were traveling in the GJ -17C-7770 on 9.11.1997. The driver of the jeep was at a moderate speed and on the correct side but the opponent driver of a truck No. GJ-7x-113 came in a excessive speed came in a rash and negligent manner and violently dashed the jeep. Thus, the claimant sustained grievous injuries on the various parts of the body resulting into permanent disability.

¶27

Learned advocate Mr. Shah submitted that the claimant is a housewife and her age at the time of accident was 30 and she sustained 30% disability while 6% was permanent partial disability for body as a whole agreed upon by the parties by purshis 31. Learned advocate Mr. Hemal submitted that pain, shock and suffering is on a lower side and the learned Tribunal ought to have granted proportionate amount under the medical bills, as could not be produced as being a house wife the amount would have been expended by other family members and it is stated that the proportionate amount under the head of transportation expenses and special diet ought to have been granted.

¶28

Learned advocate Mr. Shah submitted that the

¶29

Page 2 of 4

¶30

C/FA/4231/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

¶31

accident is of the year 1997 and under all the heads just and reasonable amount is granted which requires no interference from this Court and further submitted that the claimant could not prove any income where she is a house wife and in absence of medical documents, learned advocate Mr. Shah submitted that the amount granted under the pain, shock and suffering is just and reasonable.

¶32

Taking the fact into consideration and the claimant being house wife, this Court considers just and reasonable to grant amount of Rs 3000/- per month and further following the disability which has been consented by the parties being 6% and taking the age into consideration applying the multiplier of 15, the future loss of income would come to Rs 32,400(Rs 3000X6%X12x15).

¶33

5.1 Under the head of medical expense it is just and reasonable to enhance the money which this Court considers as Rs 5000/- and the amount under pain, shock and suffering is required to be granted as Rs 12,500/-. Thus, for transportation, attendant charges and special diet, while considering the other evidence the amount under the said head is granted as Rs 10000/-.

¶34

Considering the disability the actual loss of 1 ½

¶35

Page 3 of 4

¶36

C/FA/4231/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/12/2022

¶37

month can be considered and thus under the said head Rs 4,500/- is granted.

¶38

The computation is as under :

¶39

Particulars	Amount
Future loss of income	Rs 32,400/-
Medical expense	Rs 5000/-
Pain,shock and suffering	Rs 12,500/-
Transportation, attendant, special diet	Rs 10,000/-
Actual Loss of income	Rs 4,500/-
Total	Rs 64,400/-

¶40

The amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal is Rs 27,200/- with 7.5 % p.a. The enhanced amount would be Rs 37,200/-, to be deposited within eight weeks by opponents no.1, 2 and 3 jointly and severally at 7.5% p.a

¶41

Accordingly the Appeal is partly allowed. Award be amended accordingly. R & P to be send back to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶42

(GITA GOPI,J)

¶43

MARY VADAKKAN

¶44

Page 4 of 4

Madinabibi Nashirkhan Makrani v. Mahemood Ishak Madari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madinabibi Nashirkhan Makrani v. Mahemood Ishak Madari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pushpaben W/O Dhirubhai Chhaganbhai Parmar Vs State of Gujarat

Nitin Shashikant Rathod Vs Isha Suppliers Thro Proprietor

Hardik Manharlal Kotecha Vs State of Gujarat

Kishorpari @ Trilokpari Gajrajpari Goswami Thro Goswami Minaben Trilokpari Vs State of Gujarat

Manubhai Neviyabhai @ Nevabhai Parmar Vs State of Gujarat

Ahmadhusen Valimahammad Saiyed Vs State of Gujarat