IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 176 of 2014 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

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

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Versus DELETED & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/

REPRESTENTATIVES for the Defendant(s) No. 3 DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 1 MR MTM HAKIM(1190) for the Defendant(s) No. 3.1,3.2 UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Defendant(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

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

JUDGMENT

1. Captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 21.08.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Aux) Panchmahals at Godhra in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.867 of 2009, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.6,04,000/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal are that on 16.04.2009, at about 18:30 hours, the deceased- Rakeshbhai Nanjibhai was travelling to Devgadh Bariya in the Jeep bearing registration No.GJ-17-C-1076 which was being driven by Opponent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner. While they were passing through Wada Ghata near Village Aamli, opponent No.1 lost control of the steering of the Jeep, as a result of which the jeep turned turtle and Rakeshbhai sustained fatal injuries. He was immediately rushed to Civil Hospital, Dahod, where he succumbed to his injuries.

2.1 The notices/summons of the Claim Petition were duly served upon the opponents. The opponent No.2 & 3 appeared and filed Written Statements vide Exhibits-15 & 12, denying the contents of the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

2.2. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues at Exhibit-17, for determination.

“1. Whether it is proved that the deceased sustained injuries and died on account of rashness or negligence in driving on the part of the driver of vehicle involved in the accident?

2. What amount, if any, the claimants are entitled to by way of compensation and from which of the opponents?

3. What order?”

2.3 Having considered the oral as well as documentary evidence on record and having considered the submissions of the learned advocates for the parties, the learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.6,04,000/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization.

2.4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the appellant-Insurance Company preferred the captioned appeal on the ground of its liability to satisfy the impugned judgment and award.

3. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

4. Ms. Masumi Nanavati, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company, vehemently submitted that at the time of accident, 35 passengers were travelling in the jeep in question. She further submitted that the jeep was being used for transportation purpose. She further submitted that the claim of the respondents was not covered under the policy as the vehicle was being used in violation of policy. The terms and conditions of the policy have been breached, therefore, the impugned judgment and award is liable to be set aside.

5. On the other hand, Mr. M T M Hakim, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimants/respondent Nos.3.1 and 3.2, vehemently submitted that at the time of accident, the claimant was working as a conductor on the offending vehicle. He further submitted that the insurance policy has been prov