LAWS(GJH)-2026-3-56

AMBALA MULJIBHAI MAKWANA Vs. JIGNESH R. SHAH

Decided On March 02, 2026
Ambala Muljibhai Makwana Appellant
V/S
Jignesh R. Shah Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The captioned appeal is directed against the common judgment dtd. 27/4/2012 (hereinafter referred to as "the common judgment") passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition nos. 896 of 2003 and 1464 of 2003 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") whereby both the claim petitions are partly allowed by the Tribunal. In Motor Accident Claim Petition no. 896 of 2003, the Tribunal allowed the claim of Rs.18,32,660.00 in favour of the claimants of the pillion rider. While the captioned appeal concerns Motor Accident Claim Petition no. 1464 of 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "the claim petition") where, the Tribunal, has allowed the compensation of Rs.10,44,212.00 together with proportionate cost and interest. The respondents are held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the captioned appeal seeking enhancement on various grounds.

(2.) Mr.Adnan Khan, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Mr. MTM Hakim, learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that on 18/1/2003, after discharging their duties, the appellant and the pillion rider, left Vadodara for Dakor. The appellant was driving the motor cycle while the deceased was pillion seated and when they were moving towards Dakor, the tanker bearing registration no. G.T.B. No. 5661 (hereinafter referred to as "the vehicle in question"), driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the motor vehicle from rear side. As a result, the appellant sustained serious injuries while the pillion rider sustained fatal injuries. It is further submitted that so far as the appellant is concerned, initially the claim lodged was for Rs.25,00,000.00; however, during the pendency of the claim petition, considering the severity of the injuries, it was enhanced to Rs.45,00,000.00.

(3.) Though served, the respondent nos. 1 and 2 have chosen not to enter appearance.