SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 13455

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HDS
CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
GAURAV JAGDISHBHAI MEGHANI – Respondent



Petitioner Advocates:MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) ,Respondent Advocate: MR.HIREN M MODI(3732)

##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/2074/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/12/2025

undefined

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2074 of 2023

With

R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1943 of 2023

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

==============================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No

==============================================

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

Versus

GAURAV JAGDISHBHAI MEGHANI & ANR.

==============================================

Appearance:

MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Appellant(s) No. 1

MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2

==============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

Date : 19/12/2025

ORAL JUDGMENT

Since both these appeals arise out of the same accident

against and the grounds and issues involved are common, they

have been heard together and are being decided by this

common judgment. The First Appeal No.2074 of 2023 arises out

of MAC Petition No.21 of 2020 and the First Appeal No.1943 of

2023 arises out of MAC Petition No.20 of 2020.

1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award

dated 23.09.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal (Main), Botad (which shall hereinafter be referred to as

Page 1 of 7

Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon Dec 22 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 27 12:12:02 IST 2025

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/2074/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/12/2025

undefined

"the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition

Nos.20 of 2020 and 21 of 2020, the appellant – Insurance

Company – original respondent no.2, has preferred the present

appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

(which shall hereinafter be referred to as "the Act" for short).

2) Heard Mr. R. P. Raval learned Advocate for the appellants –

Insurance Company and Mr. H. M. Modi learned Advocate for

respondents. Perused the original record and proceedings.

3) It is the case of the original claimant that on 05.12.2019, the

deceased Nikitaben i.e. sister of the original claimant along with

deceased Bhavnaben i.e. mother of the original claimant along

with claimant were going from Salangpur to Refada Village in

Verna Car bearing Reg. No.GJ-04-DA-5239 owned by the

opponent no.1. When they reached the place of incident at that

time the opponent no.1 was driving the said car in rash and

negligent manner due to which he lost control over the steering

and the car overturned in the Narmada Canal due to which

deceased Nikitaben and Bhavnaben drowned in the canal and

later taken out from the car and both were found in unconscious

condition. Thus, they were taken to Sonawala Hospital, where

they declared as dead. Therefore, the claimant has filed MAC

Petitions seeking compensation, wherein, the learned Tribunal

after appreciating the evidence produced on record in the

respective petitions, has partly allowed both the claim petitions.

4) Learned Advocate Mr. R. P. Raval has submitted that the learned

Tribunal has not properly considered the fact that the driver did

not have any license to drive the car on the date of accident and

therefore the Insurance Company had no liability to pay any

Page 2 of 7

Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon Dec 22 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 27 12:12:02 IST 2025

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/2074/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/12/2025

undefined

compensation and the Tribunal has committed error in ordering

pay and recover order against the appellant. He has further

submitted that the one deceased is the daughter and another

deceased is the wife of the owner cum driver of the vehicle and

hence a pay and recover order means the amount is to be paid

to the son and recovered from the father. Hence, he has

requested to allow both the appeals.

5) Learned Advocate Mr. H. M. Modi for the respondents has

submitted that the Tribunal has not committed any error in

passing the impugned judgment and hence both the appeals are

required to be dismissed.

6) Having heard both the learned Advocates, going through t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top