BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTDversusSHIVALIKABEN ASHISHKUMAR PAL
- Disposal
- 39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The appeal is dismissed; the award of Rs.3,22,583 for medical expenses stands.
Summary
The insurance company appealed a Motor Accident Claim Tribunal award of Rs.3,22,583 for medical expenses, contending that the claimant had already received Rs.1,80,000 under a mediclaim policy, making the award duplicative. The appeal was filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and was limited to a value of Rs.4,00,000, invoking the smallness‑of‑amount rule. The High Court examined the tribunal’s reasoning, noting its reliance on the Oriental Insurance Co. vs. Kokilaben decision which upheld similar awards, and also considered the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mohd. Sabeer @ Shabir Hussain. The Court found the award reasonable and saw no merit in interfering, dismissing the appeal on the ground of smallness of amount without expressing an opinion on the merits. It ordered the record to be transmitted to the tribunal for disbursement and clarified that the order does not affect other proceedings arising from the same accident.
Issues considered
- Whether the award of Rs.3,22,583 for medical expenses constitutes a duplication of the mediclaim already received
- Whether the appeal falls within the smallness‑of‑amount jurisdiction under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
- Whether the tribunal erred in awarding medical expenses despite prior payment under a separate policy
- Effect of res judicata on other proceedings arising from the same road accident
Legislation cited
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988s. 173
Subjects
Judgment
C/FA/3464/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3464 of 2022
==========================================================
BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
Versus
SHIVALIKABEN ASHISHKUMAR PAL & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 10/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] Insurance Company is in First Appeal under section
173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Challenge is made to the
judgment and award dated 29.01.2022 passed by the learned
Motor Accident Claim Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Surat in Motor
Accident Claim Petition No.556 of 2018 insofar as it awarded
Rs.3,22,583/- towards medical expenses.
[2.0] Perusal of the judgment and award indicates that
Insurance Company has challenged the judgment and award
made insofar as it awarded Rs.3,22,583/- to the victim of the road
accident.
[3.0] Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
[4.0] Learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak appearing for the
insurance company has submitted that the learned Tribunal has
awarded total Rs.7,92,943/- but the appeal is Eled on the ground
that the learned Tribunal has erroneously awarded Rs.3,22,583/-
Page 1 of 3
C/FA/3464/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026
towards medical expenses though claimant has already received
Rs.1,80,000/- toward mediclaim and hence, if the amount of
Rs.3,22,583/- is awarded to the claimant then it will be
duplication of amount. Hence, she has stated that present appeal
being restricted to the value of Rs.4,00,000/-, falls under
smallness of amount.
[5.0] Since the amount involved in the First Appeal is
Rs.3,22,583/-, paying due regard to smallness of amount, this
Court is of the considered view that the First Appeal should be
disposed of as compensation awarded seems to be just and
reasonable and no interference is called for. Even otherwise on
merits also, the learned Tribunal has assigned reasons in
paragraph 15 of the impugned judgment relying on the decision
of the coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Oriental
Insurance Company vs. Kokilaben Wd/o. Arvindbhai
Chhaganbhai Dodiya reported in 2015(3) GLR 2681 and has
awarded Rs.3,22,583/- towards medical expenses which does not
call for any interference as the claimant has received
Rs.1,88,000/- under the mediclaim policy for which she had paid
separate premium. So far as other grounds including actual loss
of income is concerned, in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Mohd. Sabeer @ Shabir Hussain vs. Regional
Manager, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation reported in
2022(0) AIJEL-SC 70212, no case is made out to interfere with the
impugned judgment and award.
[5.1] It is hereby made clear that this Court has not expressed
any opinion on merits and question of law raised in this First
Appeal and is kept open to be urged in other proceedings which
Page 2 of 3
C/FA/3464/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026
may arise from the same road accident / same judgment and
award. It is made clear that this order will not come in the way of
adjudication of any other First Appeal pending against same
judgment and award or adjudication of any other claim petition
arising from same road accident. Since the First Appeal is
disposed of only on the contention of monetary value being
small, principle of res judicata shall not be applied to any other
proceedings arising from the same road accident or same
judgment and award.
[6.0] In view of above, the First Appeal is dismissed.
Pending Civil Applications, if any, stands disposed of as having
become infructuous. No order as to costs.
[7.0] Record and Proceedings and amount, if any lying
before this Court is ordered to be transmitted to the concerned
Tribunal forthwith along with accrued interest, if any. The entire
awarded amount be disbursed and released in favour of the
claimants after due veriEcation by transferring the said amount
to the account of the claimants either by RTGS or NEFT mode.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 10/02/2026 15:01:04
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.