Gujarat High Court
New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Gitaben Dharmendrabhai Patak & 2 on 22 July, 2014
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi
Bench: Ravi R.Tripathi
C/FA/2273/2014 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2273 of 2014
With
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8109 of 2014
In
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2273 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
=======================================================================
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, 1950 or any order made
thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=======================================================================
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD....Appellant(s)
Versus
GITABEN DHARMENDRABHAI PATAK & 2....Defendant(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SUNIL B PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
Date : 22/07/2014
ORAL JUDGMENT
Page 1 of 3
C/FA/2273/2014 JUDGMENT By way of this appeal the appellant- Insurance Company has challenged order dated 18th March 2014 passed by the Seventh (Ad-hoc) Additional District Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Junagadh, in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 88 of 2012 filed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
2. It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that insurance company has raised contention in First Appeal with regard to breach of condition of policy as well as statutory rights available to the insurance company in Claim Petition filed under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In view of decision of this Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v/s. Sidikbhai Ukabhai Solanki and Anr. reported in 2012 (2)GLH 465, the appellant Insurance company has preferred this appeal with a view to see that present no fault liability award is not treated as constructive resjudicata while deciding claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
3. Considering the submission of learned advocate for the appellant herein, in the opinion of this Court, if necessary direction is given to the Honourable Tribunal not to treat the order passed by the Honourable Tribunal below application under Section 140 as constructive resjudicata nor will it come in way in any manner while deciding main claim petition filed under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, then it will meet the ends of justice.
4. In view of above, order dated 18th March 2014 passed by the Seventh (Ad-hoc) Additional District Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Junagadh, in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 88 of 2012 , will not be treated as constructive resjudicata, and will not come in way in any manner while deciding claim petition filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and Honourable Tribunal will decide the main claim petition on merits without being influenced by the order passed by the Honourable Tribunal below application under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Insurance Page 2 of 3 C/FA/2273/2014 JUDGMENT Company is at liberty to raise all the contentions which are available under the law before the Honourable Tribunal.
5. In pursuance of the order passed by the Honourable Tribunal below application under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, after balance amount is deposited by the Insurance Company, the Honourable Tribunal will pass necessary orders under the provisions of law to disburse and invest in cumulative deposit. The claimants will file an 'Undertaking' on affidavit that claimants will not withdraw or permit to dismiss for default or non prosecution of main petition and will obtain judgment on merits.
6. In view of above, the first appeal is disposed of. Notice is discharged. No order as to costs.
As the First Appeal is disposed of, the Civil Application does not survive and the same stands disposed of accordingly.
(RAVI R.TRIPATHI, J.) sndevu Page 3 of 3