Gujarat High Court
New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Purnima Samir Roy on 14 March, 2016
Author: K.J.Thaker
Bench: K.J.Thaker
C/FA/1656/2002 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1656 of 2002
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of
the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD.....Appellant(s)
Versus
PURNIMA SAMIR ROY,WD/O LATE SAMIR NAGENDRANATH ROY &
6....Defendant(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SUNIL B PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR MEHUL S SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Defendant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1 - 5 , 7
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 6
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER
Date : 14/03/2016
Page 1 of 3
HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sun Mar 20 00:44:06 IST 2016
C/FA/1656/2002 JUDGMENT
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and award dated 7.1.2002, passed in MAC Petition No. 527/2000 by MAC Tribunal (Main) Kachchh at Bhuj.
2. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perused the papers. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepal Girishbhai Soni and ors. vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Baroda, reported in (2004)5 SCC 385, governing the field now. This First Appeal is of the year 2002 is filed by the appellant - Insurance Company on the ground that the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal under section 163-A of the Act, is final award and not interim, and therefore, the claimants are now not entitled to proceed with sec. 166 application. The original claimants had also submitted an application claiming compensation under section 163-A of the Act on no fault basis. It is now no longer res integra and the impugned judgment and award of learned Tribunal will have to be confirmed.
3. However, it goes without saying and a statement is also made by the learned counsel for the respondents-ori. Claimants that though they having claimed under sec. 163-A of the Act, but now they have no right to claim under sec. 166 of Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sun Mar 20 00:44:06 IST 2016 C/FA/1656/2002 JUDGMENT the Act as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Deepal Girishbhai Soni and ors. vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Baroda, reported in (2004)5 SCC 385, and the said matter may be ordered to be defiled by the Tribunal. It has been submitted by the learned advocate for the respondents that they will not be asked for revival as the same if defiled and dismissed by this order.
4. In the result, this appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 7.1.2002 passed under section 163-A of the Act is confirmed. The application under sec. 166 of the Act is ordered to be defiled and same is hereby dismissed as not pressed by the claimants. Writ to be sent to the concerned Tribunal, whereunder, the MAC Petition No. 527/2000 is pending.
(K.J.THAKER, J) mandora Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sun Mar 20 00:44:06 IST 2016