C/FA/924/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 924 of 2013 ========================================================== HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Versus KANABHAI BIJALBHAI CHAD & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR CHIRAYU A MEHTA(3256) for the Defendant(s) No. 8 MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 7 RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 9 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA Date : 08/08/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard Mr. Chirayu Mehta, learned advocate for for the respondent No.8-IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd. 2. Learned advocate has drawn the attention of this Court to the fact that in the present impugned order, the opponents have been directed to pay jointly and severally sum of Rs.4,62,833/- as compensation to the claimants along with interest at the rat of 9% from the date of presentation of the claim petition till its realization. 3. It was submitted by learned advocate Shri Mehta that in the present case, there are two Insurance Companies, who in the original proceedings were impleaded as opponents C/FA/924/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2025 No.2 and 4 respectively, who had insured the tractor and trolley involved in the accident. It appears that opponent No.4-HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co.Ltd. has filed the present appeal, which Insurance Company had insured the trolley, which was attached to the tractor. 4. It appears that the incident happened as trolley had suffered a puncture and therefore, it was to be mended, for which a jack was applied. Unfortunately, the jack skid and, therefore, the vehicle fell down and the individual mending the puncture sustained injuries, and ultimately succumbed to the injuries. 5. It appears from the impugned award that the owners of the tractor and trolley have been held jointly and severally responsible to pay compensation amount. Naturally, respective share of the individual Insurance Company, who were to indemnify the owners would be Rs.2,31,000/- each. 6. What could be noticed that the present appellant insurance company has assailed the amount falling in its share, viz. Rs.2,31,000/-. This is a small and meager amount and considering the aspect of having no dispute in regards to the road accident, I am of the opinion that this C/FA/924/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2025 appeal may not deserve consideration, more particularly, on the ground of smallness of amount. Accordingly, present First Appeal stands dismissed. 7. It is made clear that present First Appeal is dismissed on account of smallness of the amount and the order passed by this Court shall not be treated as precedent so as to say that this Court has decided any issue on merit. The whole purpose to dismiss the appeal on account of smallness of amount is with a view to avoid hardship both physically and financially on the part of the original claimant to appear and defend the case. Therefore, this order shall not be cited as precedent in any pending matters arising from same accident before any Court. 8. R & P, if any, to be sent back to the concerned Court immediately. 9. The appellant is at liberty to revive the appeal in case of difficulty. 10. Consequently connected application/s, if any, also stands disposed of. 11. The learned Tribunal is directed to disburse the entire amount to the claimant after due and proper verification. 12. While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the C/FA/924/2013 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2025 courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law. (J. L. ODEDRA, J) SUDHIR Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: SUDHIR ACHUTHAN EZHUTHASSAN(HC00192), GOV, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/08/2025 19:05:50