IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1642 of 2011 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ==========================================================

HEIRS & LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF MINOR SANJAYKHA @ JAHID &

ORS.

Versus FIROJSHA ALAMSHA MOGAL (FAKIR) & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR MEHUL S SHAH(772) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2 MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI Date : 11/02/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 06.01.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.514 of 2008, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.1,54,500/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal is that the deceased Sanjaykhan @ Jahid Joravarkha Bloch had gone to village Gheti for buying grass and fodder for his cattle and from there, and when he was returning to his home at Palitana by loading the grass in Three Wheel tempo bearing registration No.GJ-4-U-9751, as the owner of the goods loaded in the said vehicle, reached near Bhavani Temple on Gheti Road, in the meantime respondent No.1 started to drive the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner at excessive speed and he took the sudden turn, resultantly deceased Sanjaykhan @ Jahid Joravarkha Bloch fell down from the said tempo and sustained grievous injuries and subsequently he succumbed to the injuries. The claim petition came to be filed under Section 163-A of the M. V. Act, for seeking the compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-. It has also been averred that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 14 years and he was doing the business of animal husbandry and supplying of milk and thereby earning a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month and he was also maintaining his parents.

3. On being served, the respondent No.1 and 2 have chosen not to appear before the learned Tribunal. However, the respondent No.3- Insurance Company had filed the written statement at Exh-10 thereby denying the averments made in the claim petition and prayed for rejection of the claim petition.

4. Having considered the pleadings, evidence and submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties, the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.1,54,500/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. However, the learned Tribunal had exonerated the respondent No.3- Insurance Company from satisfying the award.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the original claimants/appellants- herein challenged the impugned judgment and award on the ground of exoneration of the Insurance Company.

6. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

7. Mr. Mehul S. Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimants/appellants- herein, vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal had exonerated the Insurance Company on two counts i.e. driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid driving license and secondly on the ground that the deceased was travelling in the goods vehicle by sharing the seat of driver. As the offending vehicle has the sitting capacity of one person only. He further submitted that the driving license of the respondent No.1 was proved on record at mark 28/1. He further submitted that the respondent No.1 was holding the driving license to drive the LMV and the said license was valid wit