New India Insurance Co Ltd vs Akash Rameshbhai Khabrani
2021 Latest Caselaw 3117 Guj

        C/FA/1170/2014                                           ORDER



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                R/FIRST APPEAL NO.               1170 of 2014

==========================================================
                NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD
                           Versus
           AKASH RAMESHBHAI KHABRANI & 5 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
 for the Defendant(s) No. 3
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MS TEJAL K SHAH(2719) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED(64) for the Defendant(s) No. 4,5,6
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA

                              Date : 23/02/2021

                                  ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr. H.G.Mazmudar, learned advocate for the appellant, Mr. Hiren Modi, learned advocate for respondent no.1 and Ms. Tejal K. Shah, learned advocate for respondent no.2. Though served, no one appears for the respondents no. 4 to 6.

2. By this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant­insurance company has challenged the judgment and award dated 30.09.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in MACP No. 719/2007 whereby the Tribunal was pleased to award compensation of Rs. 67,491/­ to be paid jointly and severally with 7.5% interest p.a. from the date of filing

C/FA/1170/2014 ORDER

of the claim petition till its realisation.

3. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the contentions raised in the claim petition, on the grounds of smallness of amount, no interference is called for.

4. Mr. Mazmudar, learned advocate appearing for the appellant has raised the contention as regards negligence. However, in facts of this case, considering the amount involved, no interference is called for.

5. The appeal is not entertained and dismissed on the short ground of smallness of amount and the same shall not be treated as precedent in any other case.

(R.M.CHHAYA, J) BIJOY B. PILLAI