Gujarat High Court
Lhs Of Late Dhirajbhai Ratilal Modi Deep ... vs Prakash Singh Kaluji Solanki on 30 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2107/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2107 of 2024
==========================================================
LHS OF LATE DHIRAJBHAI RATILAL MODI DEEP MODI S/O LATE
JIGNESHKUMAR DHIRAJBHAI MODI
Versus
PRAKASH SINGH KALUJI SOLANKI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. NISARG N JAIN(8807) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS. PRAKRITEE JAIN(14342) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
MR YOGI K GADHIA(5913) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 30/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is directed against the order dated 09.12.2023 passed below Exh-1 in MACP No. 163 of 2021 in Lok Adalat whereby the claim petition was disposed of in terms of compromise entered into between the original claimant and HDFC Ergo General Co. Limited. The petitioner herein challenges the said compromise on the ground that though the petitioner was not impleaded in the original claim petition preferred by the Uncle of the petitioner on account of the death of the grandfather of the petitioner in vehicular road accident which took place on 29.03.2021,yet he was not Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by MS.PARUL DUTTA(HCD0073) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 07:06:32 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2107/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined made party to the compromise. He further submitted that on gaining the knowledge of the claim petition, the petitioner herein preferred an application below (Exh-8) for impleading him as a party in the claim petition. The said application came to be allowed by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 07.06.2022 passed below Exh-8, and he was impleaded as a co-respondent in the said claim petition. Thereafter, without the knowledge and consent of the petitioner, the original claimant and the HDFC Ergo General Co. Limited settled the matter for a total compensation of Rs. 4,75,000/- in the Lok Adalat. He further submitted that the petitioner has never received any notice of the Lok Adalat nor he was made the party to the said compromise therefore, the compromise entered into between the original claimant and the respondent no. 3-Insurance Company is not sustainable in the eyes of law. He further submitted that the order passed by the learned Tribunal below Exh-1 on the basis of said compromise is liable to be set aside.
2. Learned counsel Mr. Vishal Mehta appearing on behalf of original respondent no. 4 submitted that he has no objection if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Tribunal.
3. Learned counsel Mr. Yogi Ghadiya appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3 herein i.e. HDFC Ergo General Co.
Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by MS.PARUL DUTTA(HCD0073) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 07:06:32 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2107/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined Limited vehemently submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and award dated 09.12.2020 passed in the Lok Adalat.
4. Ms. Kirti Pathak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2 i.e. Reliance General Insurance Co. Limited submitted that when the matter has been settled between the original claimant and the respondent no. 3- Insurance Company in the Lok Adalat, the award passed by the Lok Adalat has attained the finality and the respondent no. 2 should not be drugged into litigation unnecessarily therefore, the petition qua respondent no. 2 deserves to be dismissed.
5. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and having perused the record, it transpires that MACP No. 163 of 2021 was preferred by the original claimant namely Ankit Kumar Dhirajlal Modi (respondent no.4) for seeking the compensation of Rs. 5 Lacs on account of the death of his father in vehicular accident which took place on 29.03.2021 at about 7:30. The petitioner herein is the grandson of Dr. Dhirajlal Ratilal Modi who succumb to injuries in the said accident. The original claimant (uncle of the petitioner) and respondent no. 4 herein has not impleaded him in the claim petition. On gaining the knowledge of pendency of the petition, the petitioner herein through his mother preferred the application below Exh-8 for Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by MS.PARUL DUTTA(HCD0073) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 07:06:32 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2107/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined impleading him as a party in the petition being the legal representative and legal heir of the deceased Dr. Dhirajlal Ratilal Modi. The original claimant filed the reply to the said application and having considered the reply, the learned Tribunal vide order dated 07.06.2022 allowed the impleadment of the petitioner herein as co-respondent in the said claim petition. Thereafter, it appears that at the request of original claimant and the Insurance Company i.e. HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company, the matter was placed before the Lok Adalat and in the said Lok Adalat the original claimant without the knowledge of the present petitioner, settled the matter for a sum of Rs. 4,75,000/-. Though the petitioner is the Class-1, legal heir of deceased Dr. Dhirajlal Ratilal Modi, but he was not made a party to the compromise hence, the compromise was entered by the original claimant and the respondent no. 3-Insurance Company at the back of the petitioner herein. By entering into compromise behind back of the petitioner, the right of the present petitioner has been prejudiced. On the basis of the terms agreed in the compromise pursis, the learned Tribunal passed the order below Exh-1. In the said order, no apportionment of the amount of compensation was made in favour of the present petitioner. Thus, having considered all these materials, I am of the view that the learned Tribunal has committed material irregularity and illegality in recording the compromise behind Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by MS.PARUL DUTTA(HCD0073) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 07:06:32 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2107/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined the back of the present petitioner which caused prejudice to the right of the petitioner to get the compensation on account of the death of his grandfather. So far as, the contention of Mr. Ghadiya is concerned and Ms. Pathak learned advocates appearing for the respective Insurance Companies, is concerned the same is not sustainable in the fact and circumstances of the case.
6. Therefore, in my considered view the petition is deserved to be allowed and accordingly the impugned order dated 09.12.2023 passed by learned Tribunal (Aux.) Banaskata at Palanpur in MACP No. 163 of 2021 is deserved to be set aside and according to the impugned order dated 09.12.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Tribunal to decide the same afresh as per law. No order as to costs.
7. At this juncture, it is directed that the amount deposited by the Insurance Company shall be kept in FDR till the final disposal of the claim petition and thereafter, it will be dealt as per final judgment and award to be passed by the learned Tribunal.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) PD Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by MS.PARUL DUTTA(HCD0073) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 07:06:32 IST 2025