JASHMATBHAI HARDASBHAI VORA vs M J TRAMBADIYA
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
- Case type
- FIRST APPEAL
- Decided on
- 09-03-2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1870 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
JASHMATBHAI HARDASBHAI VORA & ANR.
Versus
M J TRAMBADIYA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS MAMTA R VYAS(994) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR SUNIL B PARIKH(582) for the Defendant(s) No. 4
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 09/03/2026
JUDGMENT
Heard Ms. Mamta R. Vyas, learned advocate on record for the
appellants – original claimants and Mr. Palak H. Thakkar, learned
advocate on record for the respondent no.2- United India Insurance
Company Ltd., and learned advocate Mr. Sunil B. Parikh for
respondent no. 4-National Insurance Company Ltd.
2. The rule of admission issued by this court in the captioned
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
appeal, is reported to have been duly served upon the respondent
nos.1 and 3; however, no appearance has been entered on their
behalf.
3. Considering the limited issue involved, with the consent of
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is
finally heard.
4. The present appeal is filed at the instance of original claimants
under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be
referred as “the Act of 1988”), being aggrieved and dissatisfied with
the judgment and award dated 12.08.2013 (hereinafter to be referred
as “the impugned judgment and award”) passed by the learned Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Rajkot in Motor Accident Claim
Petition No.782 of 2003.
4.1 By the said impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has
partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the present appellants
by awarding compensation of Rs.1,54,500/- with interest at the rate
of 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition, till its actual
realization, to be realized from opponent nos.1 to 3, jointly and
severally.
5. Learned advocate for the appellants, at the outset, has placed
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
K.R. Jagdish and another vs. National Insurance Company Limited
and Another reported in 2025 ACJ 1881 . It is submitted that Section
163A(1) read with the Second Schedule of the Act of 1988, has been
amended vide Notification dated 22.05.2018 and as per 2018
amendment, the amount of compensation has been enhanced from
Rs. 1 Lakh to Rs. 5 Lakhs.
5.1 It is further submitted that before the Supreme Court, the
appeal was preferred by the original claimants, being aggrieved by
the order of the High Court, upholding the rejection of the claim
petition preferred under Section 163A of the Act of 1988. The Tribunal
had rejected the claim petition holding that the insurer of the
motorcycle was not liable, since the involvement of the motorcycle in
the accident had not been established. The High Court, by impugned
judgment, had upheld the said order. The appellants have placed
reliance upon the documentary evidences including the FIR, to
indicate the genuineness of the accident and its connection with the
death of the deceased.
5.2 It is further submitted that even under the no fault liability
scheme, more particularly, under Section 163 of the Act of 1988, a
statutory amount was required to be paid to the claimants. The
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
Supreme Court, having appreciated the record as well as the amended
provision of Section 163A of the Act of 1988, held that, the appellants
were entitled to statutory compensation under the Act. On the issue
of the quantum of compensation, refuting the submissions of the
respondent-Insurance Company that the amount be confined to Rs. 1
lakh, it is held that, in view of the 2018 amendment, whereby the
amount has been enhanced to Rs. 5 lakhs, considering the settled
principles that beneficial legislation has to be applied retrospectively,
the appellants-original claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs. 5
lakhs, as per the amended provision.
5.3 Referring to the aforesaid judgment, the learned advocate has
submitted that in the present case also, the claim petition was
preferred under Section 163A of the Act of 1988 and the amended
provision of 2018 being held retrospectively applicable, the claimants
shall be entitled to the benefit of the amended provision and the
Schedule appended therein. She has, therefore, urged this court to
allow the present appeal as well as to enhance the amount of
compensation to the tune of Rs.5 Lakhs. She has lastly submitted that,
considering the facts of the case, the interest awarded by the Tribunal
may also be considered at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the
claim petition till its actual realization.
Page 4 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
6. Mr. Palak H. Thakkar, learned advocate on record for the
respondent no.2, has vehemently objected to the aforesaid
submissions of the learned advocate for the appellants. It is submitted
that, in the facts of the case and the evidence brought on record,
considering the fact that the claim petition was filed in the year 2003,
it would be governed by the provisions prevailing at the relevant point
of time. According to the learned advocate, the Tribunal has rightly
awarded the amount of Rs. 1,54,500/- in the facts of the case and the
evidence on record, which calls for no interference. As regards the
submission made by the learned advocate for the appellants to
consider 9% rate of interest instead of 8%, the learned advocate has
submitted that the Tribunal has awarded just compensation. He has,
therefore, prayed for dismissal of the present appeal.
7. Learned advocate Mr. Sunil B. Parikh has appeared on behalf of
the respondent no. 4- Insurance Company and has submitted that the
said Insurance Company has been exonerated and is held not liable to
pay any amount of compensation. He has, therefore, urged this court
to pass appropriate orders.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates
appearing for the respective parties and having perused the findings
and reasons assigned by the Tribunal, in light of the record and
Page 5 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
proceedings made available, the only limited issue, which arises for
consideration of this court in the present appeal is, as to whether the
Tribunal committed any error in awarding the amount of
compensation to the tune of Rs.1,54,500/- with 8% interest, in the
facts of the case and the evidence brought on record?
9. It is an undisputed fact that the accident had taken place on
22.06.2003, wherein the deceased Hareshbhai Jashmatbhai Vora had
succumbed to the fatal injuries. In the absence of any appeal filed by
either of the respondents against the impugned judgment and award,
the fundamental facts of the case i.e. the involvement of the vehicle
and the liability of the Insurance Company so determined, have
remained uncontroverted. It is also an undisputed fact that the claim
petition was preferred under Section 163A of the Act of 1988.
Considering the provision, as existing on the date of occurrence of the
accident, the Tribunal having examined the claim petition, has
accordingly awarded the sum of Rs. 1,54,500/- with interest at the rate
of 8% by holding the original opponents nos. 1 to 3 jointly and
severally, liable to pay the amount of compensation, whereas,
rejecting the claim petition against original opponent no. 4. The said
claim petition preferred under Section 163A of the Act of 1988 came
to be disposed of vide common judgment and award dated
12.08.2013, which is the subject matter of challenge in the captioned
Page 6 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
appeal, which has been registered on 10.09.2015. Pending the
captioned appeal, the provisions of Section 163A of the Act of 1988
came to be amended vide Notification dated 22.05.2018. As regards
the applicability of the amended provision is concerned, the said
provision has been held retrospectively applicable, considering the
settled principles that the Motor Vehicles Act is considered as a
beneficial legislation, and in case, where the proceedings are pending
consideration, the court, considering the fact that it would be
favorable to consider the law, has held the amended provision
retrospectively applicable, thereby extending the benefit of the
enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 5 Lakhs under the Schedule
appended to Section 163A of the Act of 1988.
10. Considering the facts of the case as noted and the aforesaid law
laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of K.R. Jagdish (supra) ,
the appellants are also entitled to the enhanced amount of
compensation of Rs.5 Lakhs.
11. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The impugned
judgment and award dated 12.08.2013 passed by the learned Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Rajkot in Motor Accident Claim
Petition No.782 of 2003, is hereby modified and the appellants-
original claimants are, therefore, held entitled to the amount of
Page 7 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026
C/FA/1870/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026
compensation to the tune of Rs.5 Lakhs instead of Rs.1,54,500/- with
interest at the rate of 8% from the date of the claim petition till its
actual realization.
12. The aforesaid amount is directed to be deposited with the
concerned Tribunal, preferably within a period of six weeks from the
date of receipt of this order. On deposit of the aforesaid enhanced
amount by the respondent no.2-Insurance Company, the Tribunal is
directed to release and disburse the aforesaid amount in favour of the
original claimants, subject to due verification, strictly in accordance
with the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this
regard. While making the payment, learned Tribunal shall deduct the
Court Fees, if not paid, in accordance with prevailing Rule. Let the
aforesaid exercise be undertaken by the Tribunal within a period of
two weeks from the date of deposit of the award amount.
13. With these observations, the First Appeal stands disposed of in
the aforesaid terms. Record and proceedings are directed to be sent
back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith along with the Writ of this
judgment.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
SUYASH SRIVASTAVA
Page 8 of 8
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Mon Mar 09 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 09 18:52:47 IST 2026