Gujarat High Court
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Anitaben Wd/O Gautamkumar ... on 27 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/556/2020 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 556 of 2020
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 557 of 2020
==========================================================
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD
Versus
ANITABEN WD/O GAUTAMKUMAR PRABHASHANKAR UPADHYAY &
ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS DIMPLE A THAKER(6838) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HARSHADRAY A DAVE(3461) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR PARESH M DARJI(3700) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 27/01/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeals, under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, are preferred by the appellant - Insurance
Company being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment
and award dated 31.08.2018 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Anand in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.268
of 2008 and MACP No.669 of 2013.
2. Learned advocate Ms.Thaker for the appellant - Insurance
Company submitted that learned Tribunal has believed that no
vehicle is involved in the road accident, deceased himself was
riding vehicle and at the relevant time, tyre got burst and vehicle
turned turtle. Wife being occupant in the vehicle received
injuries, whereas driver who was deceased lost his life. She
would submit that in view of this fact, even case under section
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/556/2020 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025
undefined
163A is not maintainable. One cannot claim compensation for
own negligence and therefore, it is submitted that learned
Tribunal committed serious error in granting compensation in
case of claim case filed by legal representatives of Gautambhai
and therefore, it is submitted to allow the appeal and set aside
the order passed in MACP No.669 of 2013.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Dave as well as learned advocate
Mr.Darji for the respondents supported impugned judgment and
finding arrived therein and submitted that issue whether
negligence of driver of vehicle can be considered or not, is no
more res-integra in view of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of Shivaji and Anr. v/s. United India Insurance
Company Ltd. [Civil Appeal No.2816 of 2018]. It is submitted
that learned Tribunal has rightly passed award in favour of the
claimants.
4. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perusing
Record and Proceedings, what could be noticed that MACP
No.268 of 2013 is filed by Anitaben who has received injury from
road accident and MACP No.669 of 2013 is filed by legal
representatives of Gautambhai for getting compensation on
account of his death out of road accident. Both the claim
petitions are filed under section 163A of the MV Act. Sole
argument of learned advocate Ms.Thaker for the appellants is
that no other vehicle is involved in the road accident and
therefore, legal heirs of deceased Gautambhai cannot get
compensation for own negligence in causing road accident.
Road accident took place in such a way that tyre of the Maruti
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/556/2020 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025
undefined
Car got burst while it was going on Ahmedabad Vadodara
Highway, near village Kanabha, and therefore, the vehicle turned
turtle. Anitaben received serious injuries and Gautambhai who
was riding Maruti Car sustained fatal injuries.
5. Record and Proceedings indicates that learned advocates
for both the sides have agreed to particular amount as
compensation by filing purshish at Exh.50 and Exh.51. Learned
Tribunal followed the said agreement between the learned
advocate for the claimant and learned advocate for the insurance
company and passed award by taking aid of judgment of Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Shivaji (supra) to believe that defence
of negligence of the claimant by the insurer would be
inconsistent with the legislative object behind introduction of
provision of section 163A of MV Act.
6. Considering above fact situation, I find that learned
Tribunal has not committed any error in assessing just,
adequate and fair compensation.
7. For the foregoing reasons, the appeals deserves no merits
and accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.
8. The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded amount
lying in the FDR and/or with the Tribunal, with accrued interest
thereon, if any, to the claimant, by account payee cheque /
NEFT / RTGS, after proper verification and after following due
procedure.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/556/2020 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2025
undefined
9. While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the
courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
10. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned
Tribunal, forthwith.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SATISH
