ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY vs SANJAYBHAI DHULABHAI RATHOD

Court
Gujarat High Court

C/FA/2831/2014 (GJHC240408972014) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2831 of 2014
==========================================================
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Versus
SANJAYBHAI DHULABHAI RATHOD & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DAKSHESH MEHTA(2430) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1.5,1.6,1.7
ADVOCATE NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1.2,1.3,1.4
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

Date : 03/09/2026

JUDGMENT
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant –
Insurance Company being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
judgment and award passed the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Main), Anand dated 31.03.2014 in M.A.C.P. No.824
of 2011 with allied matter, the appellant is before this Court.
2. Brief facts of the case are that, on 30.11.2011,
Sanjay Dhulabhai Rathod was driving motorcycle No. GJ-23-F-
6064 with one person as a pillion rider. When they reached
near Sinjvada Bus Stand, opponent No.1, driving Maruti Car
No.GJ-23-A-1963 at an excessive speed, in a rash and
negligent manner and endangering human life, came from the
opposite direction on the wrong side of the road and dashed
against the motorcycle from the front. As a result, Sanjaybhai
was thrown off the motorcycle and fell on the roadside along
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Tue Sep 08 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 08 19:55:37 IST 2026

C/FA/2831/2014 (GJHC240408972014) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
with the motorcycle, sustaining fatal injuries. The pillion rider,
who survived the accident, also sustained injuries, whereas
Sanjaybhai died on the spot.
2.1 An FIR being I-C.R. No.46 of 2011 in respect of the
said incident was lodged against opponent No.1 before
Limbasi Police Station.
2.2 Thereafter, the legal heirs and representatives of
the deceased filed a claim petition being MACP No.824 of
2009 before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for
short, “the Tribunal”), Anand, under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs.20 lakhs with
interest from the driver-cum-owner and insurer of the said
car.
2.3 The learned Tribunal framed the Issues at Exh.13
and permitted the parties to lead their evidence. Considering
the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal partly allowed
the claim petition and awarded compensation of
Rs.14,65,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from
30.12.2011 till realization in favour of the claimants and
directed the opponents to pay the said compensation jointly
and severally.
2.4 Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award,
the Insurance Company has preferred the present First
Appeal before this Court.
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Tue Sep 08 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 08 19:55:37 IST 2026

C/FA/2831/2014 (GJHC240408972014) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Dakshesh Mehta for
the appellant–Insurance Company. Though served, none
appeared for the respondents.
4. I have heard learned advocate for the appellant
and perused the record and proceedings. The impugned
judgment and award has been passed in respect of two claim
petitions, namely, MACP No.824 of 2011 and MACP No.825 of
2011. The impugned judgment and award is, therefore, a
common judgment and award. The Insurance Company has
not challenged the judgment and award passed in MACP
No.825 of 2009 and has accepted the findings of the learned
Tribunal to that extent. The learned Tribunal has also
recorded a finding regarding contributory negligence.
5. In view of the aforesaid factual aspect, the only
contention raised by the Insurance Company in the present
appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation
awarded by the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal
determined the quantum of compensation by relying upon the
Rajesh & Ors. v.
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Rajbir Singh & Ors., in 2013 ACJ 1403 . The said judgment
was subsequently considered and the principles therein were
National Insurance
revisited by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors., reported in (2017) 16
SCC 680 . Nonetheless, the overall assessment of
compensation made by the learned Tribunal is found to be
just, fair and adequate in favour of the claimants. Hence, this
Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Tue Sep 08 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 08 19:55:37 IST 2026

C/FA/2831/2014 (GJHC240408972014) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
judgment and award.
6. In view of the above, this Court, without entering
into the other aspects of the matter, deems it fit to dismiss the
present appeal and the same is dismissed. Accordingly, the
impugned judgment and award passed by the learned
Tribunal is hereby confirmed. The interim relief, if any, stands
vacated. The Record and Proceedings, if any, be sent back to
the concerned Tribunal.
If any amount is lying deposited with the learned
Tribunal, the same shall be disbursed in favour of the
claimants forthwith in accordance with law.
7. Connected Civil Application, if any, does not
survive and stands disposed of accordingly.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
MANOJ
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Tue Sep 08 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 08 19:55:37 IST 2026