Gujarat High Court
Gujarat State Road Transport ... vs Umarbhai Musabhai Patel on 13 December, 2021
C/FA/4089/2006 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4089 of 2006
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4090 of 2006
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4091 of 2006
================================================================
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
UMARBHAI MUSABHAI PATEL & 4 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. DEVANG BHATT with MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Appellant(s) No.
1
MR SANDIP C SHAH(792) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 13/12/2021
ORAL ORDER
ORDER IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 4089 of 2006
1. The present appeal is preferred by the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation being original opponent No. 2, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Ahmedabad in MACP No. 1160 of 1996 whereby the Tribunal has decided the claim petition vide judgment and award dated 12.10.2004.
2. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under :
2.1 On 27.01.1996 the deceased was driving ill-fated ambassador car No. GQ-1-K-1795 from Ahmedabad to Khambhat. In the same car other passengers, who are the original claimants of claim petition No. 239 of 1996 to 242 of 1996 and 244 of 1996, were also traveling. They also got injuries due to such accident. According to the case of the original Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:32:50 IST 2022 C/FA/4089/2006 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2021 claimants, their car was driven by the deceased carefully with moderate speed on its correct side from Kheda to Matar Road. When the car reached near Vav bus stand, the original opponent No.1 the S.T. bus driver came from opposite direction driven S.T.Bus No. GJ-18-V-206 in rash and negligent manner and in excessive speed. According to the original claimants, the original opponent No.1 was trying to overtake one auto-rickshaw by violating all the traffic rules and in doing so, he dashed the Ambassador car from opposite direction. Due to which, the driver of the car sustained severe Injuries and succumbed to his injuries. Thus, MACP No. 1160 of 1996 has been filed by the claimants for compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-from all the opponents whereas, other claimants have also filed their respective claim petitions to recover compensation due to the injuries which they have sustained.
3. Heard Mr. Devang Bhatt, learned advocate with Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Mr. Sandip C. Shah learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant, and perused the materials on record.
4. The main contention in the present appeal is about the quantum and the negligency. From the bare perusal of the record and proceedings, it appears that the legal heirs of the deceased have not preferred any appeal against the impugned judgment and award for enhancement. While considering the quantum the Tribunal has properly appreciated the facts and passed the impugned award. While awarding Rs. 3,15,000/- as compensation to the legal heirs and representative of the deceased with interest at the rate of 9% is not required to interfere as the impugned award is just and proper and therefore, the present first appeal fails and the impugned judgment and award remained unaltered. The Tribunal is directed to disburse the amount of compensation awarded passed by the Tribunal.Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:32:50 IST 2022
C/FA/4089/2006 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2021
5. In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed and the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is hereby confirmed. The Registry is directed to send copy of to the Tribunal forthwith. There shall be no order as to costs. Decree be drawn accordingly.
ORDER IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 4090 of 2006
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and award dated 12.10.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Ahmedabad in MACP No. 244 of 1996, the appellant-Insurance Company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
2. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under :
2.1 On 27.01.1996 the deceased was driving ill-fated ambassador car No. GQ-1-K-1795 from Ahmedabad to Khambhat. In the same car other passengers, who are the original claimants of claim petition No. 239 of 1996 to 242 of 1996 and 244 of 1996, were also traveling. They also got injuries due to such accident. According to the case of the original claimants, their car was driven by the deceased carefully with moderate speed on its correct side from Kheda to Matar Road. When the car reached near Vav bus stand, the original opponent No.1 the S.T. bus driver came from opposite direction driven S.T.Bus No. GJ-18-V-206 in rash and negligent manner and in excessive speed. According to the original claimants, the original opponent No.1 was trying to overtake one auto-rickshaw by violating all the traffic rules and in doing so, he dashed the Ambassador car from opposite direction. Due to which, the driver of the car sustained severe Injuries and succumbed to his injuries. Thus, MACP No. 1160 of 1996 has been filed by the claimants for compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-from all the opponents whereas, other claimants have also filed their respective claim petitions to recover Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:32:50 IST 2022 C/FA/4089/2006 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2021 compensation due to the injuries which they have sustained.
3. Heard Mr. Devang Bhatt, learned advocate with Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Mr. Sandip C. Shah learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant, and have also perused the original record and proceedings.
4. Though various grounds have been raised in the memo of appeal, the fact remains that the total amount involved in the appeal is only Rs. 64,000/-. Considering the smallness of amount, this Court deems it fit not to exercise jurisdiction under Section 173 of the Act.
Accordingly, only on the ground of smallness of amount with a further clarification that this may not be considered as precedent in other claim petitions arising out of the same accident, the appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Registry is directed to send the original record and proceedings back to the Tribunal forthwith.
ORDER IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 4091 of 2006
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and award dated 12.10.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Ahmedabad in MACP No. 242 of 1996, the appellant-Insurance Company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
2. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under :
2.1 On 27.01.1996 the deceased was driving ill-fated ambassador car No. GQ-1-K-1795 from Ahmedabad to Khambhat. In the same car other passengers, who are the original claimants of claim petition No. 239 of 1996 to 242 of 1996 and 244 of 1996, were also traveling. They also got injuries due to such accident. According to the case of the original Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:32:50 IST 2022 C/FA/4089/2006 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2021 claimants, their car was driven by the deceased carefully with moderate speed on its correct side from Kheda to Matar Road. When the car reached near Vav bus stand, the original opponent No.1 the S.T. bus driver came from opposite direction driven S.T.Bus No. GJ-18-V-206 in rash and negligent manner and in excessive speed. According to the original claimants, the original opponent No.1 was trying to overtake one auto-rickshaw by violating all the traffic rules and in doing so, he dashed the Ambassador car from opposite direction. Due to which, the driver of the car sustained severe Injuries and succumbed to his injuries. Thus, MACP No. 1160 of 1996 has been filed by the claimants for compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-from all the opponents whereas, other claimants have also filed their respective claim petitions to recover compensation due to the injuries which they have sustained.
3. Heard Mr. Devang Bhatt, learned advocate with Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Mr. Sandip C. Shah learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant, and have also perused the original record and proceedings.
4. Though various grounds have been raised in the memo of appeal, the fact remains that the total amount involved in the appeal is only Rs. 91,000/-. Considering the smallness of amount, this Court deems it fit not to exercise jurisdiction under Section 173 of the Act.
Accordingly, only on the ground of smallness of amount with a further clarification that this may not be considered as precedent in other claim petitions arising out of the same accident, the appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Registry is directed to send the original record and proceedings back to the Tribunal forthwith.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) T. J. Bharwad Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:32:50 IST 2022