IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1977 of 2016 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

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

DHARMISHTHABA YOGENDRASINH ZALA & ORS.

Versus JAYSHREEBA BHARATSINH ZALA & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4 MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 2 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI Date : 17/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. The captioned appeal is preferred against the impugned judgment and award dated 30.09.2015 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Surendranagar, in M.A.C.P. No. 279 of 2008, whereby the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.4,26,500/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty Six Thousand Five Hundred Only) along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization, as compensation.

2. The succinct facts, which lead to the filing of the captioned appeal are summarized as under :-

i. On 10.11.2007, at about 03:00 p.m., the deceased-Yogendrasinh was proceeding from Amrapur (Halvad) to Bangalore while driving a truck bearing Registration No. GJ-1-AU-3212. When he reached about 3 kilometers away from Devla on the Satana–Devla Road, a cow suddenly came onto the road and in an attempt to avoid hitting the animal, he lost control over the steering of the truck and collided with a neem tree. As a result of the said accident, Yogendrasinh sustained grievous injuries and subsequently succumbed to the same.

ii. The notices/summons of the Claim Petition were duly served upon the opponents. The opponent no.1 chosen not to appear before the learned Tribunal, however, the Opponent No.2- Insurance Company appeared before the learned Tribunal and filed Written-Statement at Exh.18, thereby, denying the averments made in the claim petition in toto.

iii. Having considered the oral as well as documentary evidence on record and having considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties, the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.4,26,500/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty Six Thousand Five Hundred Only) along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization, as compensation.

iv. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and award, the appellant- Insurance Company preferred the present appeal challenging impugned Judgment and award.

3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

4. Mr.Hiren Modi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant/appellant herein vehemently submitted that the claim petition came to be filed under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (herein after referred to as the “Act”). However, the learned Tribunal has exonerated the Insurance Company from satisfying the award on the ground that the claimant/appellant herein himself negligent for causing the accident. It is submitted that under Section 163(A) of the Act, the issue of negligence is irrelevant. In support of his contention, learned advocate for the claimant/appellant herein placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of United Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Sunil Kumar & Anr. passed in Civil Appeal No.9694 of 2013 dated 24.11.2017. Having placed reliance upon the aforesaid judgment, it submitted that now well settled that the issue of negligence is wholly irrelevant in the case where the claim petition came to be preferred under Section 163(A) of the Act.

5. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that it is not proved on record that the vehicle was duly insured. It is submitted tha