LILABEN RAMUBHAI VAGHRI vs GOPALBHAI MANGABHAI VAGHRI Advocate - M M CHAVADA — 264/2021
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166. Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 19th May 2026.
MACP - MAC PETITION
CNR: GJCU080014182021
Filing Number
264/2021
Filing Date
15-Jul-2021
Registration No
264/2021
Registration Date
15-Jul-2021
Court
Addl. Court,Bodeli
Judge
1-Addl. District Judge
Decision Date
19-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED
Last updated 04-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.LILABEN RAMUBHAI VAGHRI
Adv. P.P.PARMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.GOPALBHAI MANGABHAI VAGHRI Advocate - M M CHAVADA
-
2.RAMUBHAI ISWARBHAWI VAGHRI
Adv. M.M.CHAVADA
-
3.VISNUBHAI FOGATBHAI VAGHRI
Adv. M.M.CHAVADA
-
4.ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Adv. K.A.PATEL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-May-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: LILABEN RAMUBHAI VAGHRI v. GOPALBHAI MANGABHAI VAGHRI & ORS (M.A.C.P. 264/2021) Court Decision: The tribunal awarded Rs.3,60,056 compensation to the claimant but held the motorcycle owner liable instead of the tempo driver, finding the FIR was deliberately false and the actual rider lacked a valid driving license, constituting breach of insurance policy conditions. Key Reasoning: Evidence from eyewitnesses conclusively established that the accident occurred solely due to the motorcycle rider's negligence (sudden braking causing skid), not the tempo driver's conduct. The complainant admitted falsely naming the tempo driver in the FIR to conceal that unlicensed rider Naginbhai was actually driving. The insurance company was exonerated due to fundamental policy breach; the registered owner became liable as vicariously responsible for entrusting vehicle to an unlicensed driver. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-May-2026
Disposed
Addl. District Judge
-
16-May-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
04-May-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
21-Apr-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
13-Apr-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
24-Mar-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
16-Mar-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
23-Feb-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
16-Feb-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
07-Feb-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
22-Jan-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
08-Jan-2026
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
20-Dec-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
04-Dec-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
27-Nov-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
06-Nov-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
30-Oct-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
09-Oct-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
25-Sep-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
11-Sep-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
30-Aug-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
21-Aug-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
07-Aug-2025
Judgement
Addl. District Judge
-
02-Aug-2025
Final Arguments
Addl. District Judge
-
19-Jul-2025
Final Arguments
Addl. District Judge
-
05-Jul-2025
Final Arguments
Addl. District Judge
-
26-Jun-2025
Final Arguments
Addl. District Judge
-
12-Jun-2025
Final Arguments
Addl. District Judge
-
29-May-2025
Opponents Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
08-May-2025
Opponents Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
19-Apr-2025
Opponents Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
27-Mar-2025
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
01-Mar-2025
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
13-Feb-2025
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
01-Feb-2025
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
30-Jan-2025
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
09-Jan-2025
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
02-Jan-2025
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
21-Dec-2024
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
07-Dec-2024
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
05-Dec-2024
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
30-Nov-2024
Opponents Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
21-Nov-2024
Opponents Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
16-Nov-2024
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
17-Oct-2024
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
26-Sep-2024
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
12-Sep-2024
Applicants Evidence
Addl. District Judge
-
05-Sep-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Addl. District Judge
-
17-Aug-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Addl. District Judge
-
20-Jul-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Addl. District Judge
-
15-Jun-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Addl. District Judge
-
06-Apr-2024
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
16-Mar-2024
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
02-Mar-2024
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
20-Jan-2024
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
30-Dec-2023
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
25-Nov-2023
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
07-Oct-2023
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
31-Aug-2023
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
27-Jul-2023
Written Statement/Reply
2nd Addl District Judge
-
15-Jun-2023
Summons - Notice
2nd Addl District Judge
-
27-Apr-2023
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
16-Mar-2023
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
09-Feb-2023
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
12-Jan-2023
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
13-Oct-2022
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
15-Sep-2022
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
18-Aug-2022
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
07-Jul-2022
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
05-May-2022
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
31-Mar-2022
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
13-Jan-2022
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
16-Dec-2021
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
14-Oct-2021
Summons - Notice
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
26-Aug-2021
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-Jul-2021
Case filed
Registration No. 264/2021
Case Summary: LILABEN RAMUBHAI VAGHRI v. GOPALBHAI MANGABHAI VAGHRI & ORS (M.A.C.P. 264/2021) Court Decision: The tribunal awarded Rs.3,60,056 compensation to the claimant but held the motorcycle owner liable instead of the tempo driver, finding the FIR was deliberately false and the actual rider lacked a valid driving license, constituting breach of insurance policy conditions. Key Reasoning: Evidence from eyewitnesses conclusively established that the accident occurred solely due to the motorcycle rider's negligence (sudden braking causing skid), not the tempo driver's conduct. The complainant admitted falsely naming the tempo driver in the FIR to conceal that unlicensed rider Naginbhai was actually driving. The insurance company was exonerated due to fundamental policy breach; the registered owner became liable as vicariously responsible for entrusting vehicle to an unlicensed driver. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts