Back
2026 Supreme(Guj) 445
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J.
Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Co. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Rajeshkumar Kesharsingh Arjunsingh Gujjar & Ors. – Defendants
R/First Appeal No. 4204 of 2021 With Civil Application (For Withdrawal/Disbursement Of Amount) No. 1 of 2026
Decided On : 15-06-2026
Important Points
Subject
Tort Law - Motor Accident Claims
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Dependency - Legal representatives - Loss of both parents in a single vehicular accident - Adult survivors are entitled to claim compensation regardless of their age or part-time earnings - Dependency is determined by the loss suffered due to the death of the bread-winner. (Paras 10, 13, 14, 16)
(C) Interest - Discretionary power of Tribunal - Rate of interest at 9% per annum is reasonable and within the statutory discretion afforded to the Tribunal - Appellate courts should not substitute their discretion for that of the Tribunal absent clear error or perversity in the exercise of such power. (Paras 17, 18, 20)
Facts of the case:
The appeal was filed by the insurer challenging a compensation award granted by the Tribunal for the death of both parents in a motor vehicle accident. The appellant contended that the surviving children were gainfully employed and not dependent on the deceased, and that the interest rate awarded was excessively high.
Findings of Court:
The court held that the loss of both parents entitles the legal representatives to compensation. It affirmed the Tribunal's assessment of dependency and upheld the interest rate, noting that determining the rate is a discretionary function of the Tribunal guided by the principles of justice and economic conditions.
Issues: Whether adult children of deceased parents are entitled to claim compensation as dependents and whether the appellate court should interfere with the 9% interest rate awarded by the Tribunal.
Ratio Decidendi: Every legal representative has a right to compensation under the law of torts and relevant statutes upon losing a bread-winner. The Tribunal’s discretion in awarding interest remains effective unless the rate is demonstrably unreasonable or arbitrary; given the facts, the court declined to interfere.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
For the Appellant : Mr Vibhuti Nanavati
For the Defendants : Mr Dipan Desai, MS E. Shailaja.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of accident facts and tribunal award. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. contentions regarding dependency and interest rates. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. legal principles confirming claimants' dependency status. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. discretionary authority in awarding interest on compensation. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. final conclusions and disbursement of compensation. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J.
1. The captioned appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and award dated 20.07.2021 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) & 6th Additional District Judge, Bhuj at Kachchh, in M.A.C.P. No. 130 of 2018, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the Claim Petition and awarded a sum of Rs.17,18,804/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
2. The succinct facts, which led to the filing of the captioned appeal, as narrated in the Claim Petition are summarized as under:-
i. On 03.11.2017, deceased in M.A.C.P. No.130/2018 – Girishbhai Naranbhai Chauhan was travelling along with wife and other passengers in a Maruti Swift Car bearing registration No.GJ-12-CG-9716 driven by Mr. Jayantibhai Tulshibhai. They were proceeding from Mount Abu to Gandhidham. When they reached near the place of accident, original opponent No.1 came by driving a Trailer bearing registration No.RJ-32-GB-5073, at an excessive speed and in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed with the Maruti Swift car driven by Mr. Jayantibhai Tulshibhai from the wrong side, thereby causing the vehicular accident. As a result of the said vehicular accident, all the passengers in the Maruti Car were seriously injured and they succumbed to the said injuries. Therefore, the legal heirs of the deceased – Girishbhai Naranbhai Chauhan preferred Claim Petitions before the learned Tribunal seeking compensation on account of the death of the deceased.
ii. Having been served with the notices/summons of the Claim Petition, original opponent No.3/appellant herein – Insurance Company, filed its Written Statement, thereby denying the averments made in the Claim Petition, and in brief, prayed for dismissal of the Claim Petition.
iii. Having considered the pleadings, evidence on record and the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the respective parties, the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the Claim Petition and awarded a sum of Rs.17,18,804/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
iv. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the appellant – Insurance Company has filed the captioned appeal, thereby challenging the impugned judgment and award on the ground of dependency of the claimants and the rate of interest determined by the learned Tribunal.
3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
4. Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant - Insurance Company vehemently submitted that at the time of the vehicular accident, both the claimants were gainfully engaged and were having their own source of income, as such, he contended that they were not dependent upon the deceased. He contended that the learned Tribunal committed grave error in awarding compensation to the claimants. He further submitted that the deceased was receiving the pension of Rs.19,430/- per month, which he would continue to receive till he reaches 60 years and after 60 years, he would receive 30% of the last drawn salary. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the appellant – Insurance Company placed reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13442 of 2020 titled as Vishavjit Singh & Ors. v. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited & Anr.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant - Insurance Company vehemently submitted th
