Gujarat High Court
United India Insurance Company Limited ... vs Husenbhai Insmailbhai Shaikh ... on 5 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2514/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2514 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
============================================
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED (HUB)
Versus
HUSENBHAI INSMAILBHAI SHAIKH (DELETED) & ORS.
============================================
Appearance:
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR H M SHAH(3997) for the Defendant(s) No. 2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 4
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 05/12/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1) Present appeal has been preferred by the appellant - United India Insurance Company Ltd., under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "the Act") against the judgment and award dated 19.04.2024 passed in MAC Petition No.356 of 2017, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.-III) Gandhinagar (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "Tribunal"). The said petition was filed by the claimants under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon Dec 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 20 00:45:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2514/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/12/2025 undefined compensation of Rs.7,72,500/-.
2) Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. Though served, none appears for respondent No.4.
3) The brief facts of the case is that on 14.09.2017 at 10:15 pm, Anvar Husenbhai Shaikh (who shall hereinafter be referred to as "deceased") was driving and going in a Mahindra XUV Car from Vapi to Surat on his correct side in a moderate speed with following traffic rules and when Anvar was passing near a bridge, Dharampur Circle, Vapi-Valsad Road, driver of Truck bearing Reg. No.GJ-15-Z- 0361 was going ahead in the middle of the road in rash and negligent manner, endangering human life without following traffic rules and when Anvar has shown deeper light of his car with the intention to overtake the Truck suddenly the driver of the truck has applied brake and hence the car was dashed with rear right side of the Truck. Due to which the deceased sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to it on the spot. Therefore, the legal heirs of the deceased have filed Claim Petition under Section 166 of the Act and subsequently the same was converted as petition under Section 163-A of the Act. Wherein, the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the petition.
4) Having heard both the learned Advocates and going through the record it appears that initially the petition was filed under Section 166 of the Act and subsequently the same was converted under Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon Dec 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 20 00:45:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2514/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/12/2025 undefined Section 163-A of the Act. If we peruse the second schedule in the Act upper limit of income is Rs.40,000/- per annum which is required to be considered for compensation. It is admitted fact that the learned Tribunal has considered income as Rs.6,000/- per month which is Rs.72,000/- per annum which is admittedly excessive and exorbitant, up to that extent the learned Tribunal has committed error and order is required to be interfered with. At the same time this Court has taken into consideration that after amendment to the MV Act, 2019 second schedule of Section 163-A is omitted and Section 164 has been inserted, which prescribes the amount of compensation in cases of death or grievous hurt, and in the case of death, the minimum compensation prescribed is Rs.5,00,000/-. Although the claim petition in the present case was filed prior to the amendment, i.e., in the year 2017, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Urmila Halder, reported in 2025 ACJ 244, has upheld the grant of Rs.5,00,000/- even in petitions filed under Section 163-A prior to the amendment, treating the legislation as beneficial and noting the absence of any specific bar to retrospective application.
5) For the reasons recorded above, if a lump-sum amount of Rs.5,00,000/- is awarded then purpose to award just compensation would serve. Therefore, this Court is of the view that interference is required with the impugned judgment and accordingly amount of compensation is reduced to Rs.5,00,000/- from Rs.7,72,500/-. Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon Dec 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 20 00:45:53 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2514/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/12/2025 undefined
6) Accordingly, present appeal is allowed. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Urmila Halder (supra), the award dated 19.04.2024 passed in MAC Petition No.356 of 2017, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.-III) Gandhinagar, is hereby modified, and the compensation is reduced from Rs.7,72,500/- to ₹5,00,000/-. 5,00,000/-.
7) The Appellant - Insurance Company is entitled to get refund / recover Rs.2,72,500/- with interest.
8) Record and proceedings (if any) be remitted back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
9) Award to be drawn accordingly.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon Dec 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 20 00:45:53 IST 2025