High Court of Gujarat Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Upholds Tribunal's Award of Rs.12,04,970 with 9% Interest. Negligence of Motorcycle Driver Established; No Error in Multiplier or Dependency Calculation.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-19 01:20:22

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The present appeal was filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 15.05.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Vadodara in MACP No. 250 of 2004. The Tribunal had allowed the claim petition filed by the original claimants (legal heirs of deceased Devrajbhai Randhirbhai Solanki) under Section 166 of the Act, awarding Rs.12,04,970 with 9% interest per annum from the date of filing till realization, with proportionate costs. The facts of the case are that on 30.09.2003, the deceased was riding his scooter No. GJ 6 P 6831 on Akota Road near Taj Residency Hotel, when the respondent No.1 (driver of the offending motorcycle No. GJ 6 AL 7227) came from behind in a rash and negligent manner at full speed and hit the scooter. The deceased sustained serious head injuries and succumbed on 05.10.2003. A complaint was lodged by one Chandrasinh Manilal Solanki at J.P.Road Police Station vide I.C.R. No. 398/03. The claimants sought compensation of Rs.7,00,000. The Tribunal, after considering evidence, held the driver negligent and awarded the said amount. The Insurance Company appealed, primarily contending that the Tribunal erred in holding negligence and in computing compensation. The High Court, after hearing submissions, found no merit in the appeal. The Court noted that the Tribunal had correctly assessed the evidence, including the FIR and panchnama, to conclude negligence. Regarding compensation, the Court observed that the Tribunal applied the correct multiplier of 13 based on the deceased's age (40 years) and deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses, following the principles in Sarla Verma v. DTC. The Court also noted that the Tribunal had considered the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000 per month and added future prospects. The High Court held that there was no error in the Tribunal's findings and dismissed the appeal, confirming the award.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Negligence - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The Tribunal held the driver of the offending motorcycle negligent based on evidence of rash and negligent driving from behind, causing fatal accident. The High Court found no perversity in the finding of negligence. (Paras 2-5)

B) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Multiplier and Dependency - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The Tribunal applied multiplier of 13 and deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses, computing dependency at Rs.12,04,970. The High Court upheld the computation as per settled principles, noting no error in the Tribunal's approach. (Paras 6-8)

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Tribunal erred in holding the appellant-Insurance Company liable to pay compensation and in computing the quantum of compensation.

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment and award dated 15.05.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Vadodara in MACP No. 250 of 2004.

Law Points

Motor Vehicles Act
1988
Section 173
Section 166
Negligence
Compensation
Multiplier
Dependency

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (01) 208

R/First Appeal No. 1607 of 2015

2026-01-19

D. M. Vyas

Ms. Dimple A. Thaker for the Appellant, Mr. Mohsin M. Hakim for the Respondents

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd

Ambaben Devrajbhai Solanki & Ors.

Nature of Litigation

Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

Remedy Sought

The appellant-Insurance Company sought to set aside the Tribunal's award of compensation to the claimants.

Filing Reason

The Insurance Company was aggrieved by the Tribunal's finding of negligence and the quantum of compensation awarded.

Previous Decisions

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Vadodara in MACP No. 250 of 2004 allowed the claim petition and awarded Rs.12,04,970 with 9% interest.

Issues

Whether the Tribunal erred in holding the driver of the offending motorcycle negligent? Whether the Tribunal erred in computing the compensation amount?

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant-Insurance Company argued that the Tribunal erred in holding the driver negligent and in computing compensation. The respondents-claimants supported the Tribunal's award, submitting that the findings were based on evidence and correct principles.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's finding of negligence was based on evidence and not perverse. The computation of compensation applying multiplier 13 and deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses was in accordance with settled principles. No interference warranted.

Judgment Excerpts

The present appeal is filed by the Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 15.05.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Vadodara in MACP No. 250 of 2004. This Court finds no error in the findings of the Tribunal. The appeal is dismissed.

Procedural History

The original claim petition (MACP No. 250 of 2004) was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Vadodara. The Tribunal allowed the claim on 15.05.2015. The Insurance Company filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Act on an unspecified date. The High Court heard the appeal and dismissed it on 19.01.2026.