Gujarat High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd vs Megha Sumar Harijan (Meghvar) on 10 September, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2560/2019 ORDER DATED: 10/09/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2560 of 2019
==========================================================
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
Versus
MEGHA SUMAR HARIJAN (MEGHVAR) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAULIK J SHELAT(2500) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 10/09/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate for the appellant.
2. The appeal is filed by the appellant-insurance
company challenging the judgment and award dated 8.1.2019
passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main)
Kachchh at Bhuj in MACP No.447 of 2014.
3. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are
such that the claimant/s filed the claim petition under
Section 163A of the MV Act before the learned Tribunal
stating that on 24.10.2014, the applicant's son namely
Samant Megha, aged 08 years was in the process of sitting
in the jeep from rear side and in the meanwhile, the driver
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2560/2019 ORDER DATED: 10/09/2024
undefined
suddenly took the jeep in reverse in negligent manner and
therefore the deceased fell down and at that time, the
opponent no.1 drove his vehicle in rash and negligent manner
and took the vehicle in reverse suddenly and dashed with
the deceased and caused injuries over head and face and
hence the deceased died due to those accidental injuries.
Therefore, the said petition was filed claiming compensation.
4. Notices were served, issues were framed, evidence was
led, and thereafter the learned Tribunal passed the impugned
judgment and award.
5. The same is challenged in this appeal by the appellant-
insurance company restricting the claim to Rs.2,04,500/-.
6. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
7. It is required to be noted at the outset that the claim
petition was filed under Section 163-A of the MV Act. The
contention of the learned advocate for the appellant that the
appellant-insurance company is not liable to pay the
compensation as the offending vehicle was having only an Act
policy and risk of third party is not covered and therefore
the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2560/2019 ORDER DATED: 10/09/2024
undefined
8. However, if the tenor of Section 163-A of the MV Act
is seen, then the insurance company has to satisfy the award
and it is not dependent upon other provisions of the Act and
therefore whether the deceased can be said to be a third
party or not or whether the policy covers the same or not
would not be relevant and all the claimant/s has to establish
is that the death was caused due to an accident arising out
of use of motorcycle.
9. Therefore, in view of the above and also in view of the
judgment in case of National Insurance Co.Ltd. V/s
Rukhshanaben Salimbhai Vora and another reported in
2006(3) GLR 2561, this appeal is not required to be
entertained.
10. Even considering the smallness of amount involved
in this appeal, this Court finds no reason to interfere in the
impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The
appeal, accordingly, is disposed of. Notice/Notice of admission
is discharged. Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated.
11. The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded
amount, along with accrued interest thereon if any, to the
claimant, by account payee cheque/RTGS/NEFT, after due
verification and after following due procedure, forthwith.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2560/2019 ORDER DATED: 10/09/2024
undefined
12. Record and proceedings be sent back to the
concerned Tribunal, forthwith, if not required in cognate
matter/s, if any.
13. It is made clear that this order would have no
bearing and/or shall not be considered as precedent in any of
the matters connected to the accident in question vis-a-vis
the impugned judgment and award and is without prejudice
to the rights and contentions of the either parties.
14. Since the main appeal is disposed of, connected
applications, if any, would not survive and are disposed of
accordingly.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
SRILATHA
