Gujarat High Court
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Dharmapalsinh Dhupsinh Bist on 25 September, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/542/2010 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 542 of 2010
==========================================================
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD
Versus
DHARMAPALSINH DHUPSINH BIST & 2 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR MAYUR A THAKORE(5168) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 25/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. This appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988 by the Oriental Insurance Company,
assailing the judgment and award dated 25.08.2009, in
Claim Petition No.739 of 2007, passed by the Claim
Tribunal at Ahmedabad City.
2. On 02.04.2007, the respondent Dharampalsingh Bist and
his wife Purvaben met with an accident when their Honda
bike collided with the involved tractor-tailor. The wife
being a pillion rider, died in the alleged accident and at
relevant time, she was pregnant. As per the postmortem
report, there was a female baby aged about 6 to 7
months. Thus, the claim of Rs.1 lakh was being made for
the death of unborn child. The Claim Tribunal vide its
judgment and award dated 25.08.2009, held that, when a
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/542/2010 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2023
undefined
baby died in a womb due to injuries sustained by the
mother, the legal heirs is entitled for the lumpsum
amount of compensation. Accordingly, the amount of
compensation of Rs.1 lakh was being awarded with
interest @ 9%.
3. Dissatisfied with the award, the appellant-insurance
company is before this Court.
4. Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned counsel appearing for and
on behalf of the appellant-insurance company has
submitted that, the judgment and award is against the
law and evidence on record. The learned tribunal failed to
appreciate that in the instant case, the embryo was at
the fetal stage and could not have been treated as a child
and therefore, it cannot fall under the definition of "still
born child".
5. Mr. Thakore, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf
of respondent no.1 countering to the submissions, has
contended that, the learned tribunal has awarded just
and reasonable amount which does not warrant any
interference by this Court.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties, this Court is of considered view that, there is
sufficient evidence to infer that, the baby was 6 to 7
months and considering this aspects mentioned in the
P.M. Report, the tribunal has awarded Rs.1 lakh towards
the amount of compensation. Thus, considering the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/542/2010 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2023
undefined
amount as well as the medical evidence on record, no
case is made out to interfere with the findings recorded
by the tribunal and accordingly, the appeal is hereby
dismissed.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
TAUSIF SAIYED
