Gujarat High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Tara Maheshkumar Ailsinghani on 2 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3640 of 2024
==========================================================
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
Versus
TARA MAHESHKUMAR AILSINGHANI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA B GANDHI(13129) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3
MS SHREYA M SONI(10618) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 4,5,6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 02/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company against the judgment and award dated 08.07.2024 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kheda at Nadiad in MACP No.976 of 2021, wherein the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Palak Thakkar for the appellant, learned advocate Mr.Aditya Gandhi for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Though served, none appeared for Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 21:24:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined respondent Nos.4 to 6.
3. Brief facts of the case are as under:
3.1 On 19.10.2019, at about 7.00 a.m., deceased was travelling in Maruti Swift Car bearing registration No.GJ-6HL-1552. When he reached near the place of accident which is on Mumbai-Ahmedabad Highway in the vicinity of village Deslepada, in front of Diamond Hotel, a truck bearing registration No.RJ-14-GJ-7648 being driven by opponent No.1 came in rash and negligent manner and dashed with Maruti Swift Car which was going in third lane of highway. Due to which, deceased sustained severe injuries and succumbed. FIR was lodged against driver of truck before Manor Police Station.
3.2 Legal heirs/representatives of deceased filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-. Opponents were served with notices. Opponent Nos.1 and 3 did not contest Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 21:24:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined the claim petition. Opponent No.2 - Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. insurer of Car appeared and filed a Written Statement at Ex.32. Opponent No.4 - New India Assurance Company Ltd. insurer of Truck appeared and filed Written Statement at Ex.30. Claimant No.1 filed examination-in-chief at Ex.35 and produced documents such as complaint, Panchnama, Inquest Panchnama, Postmortem report, chargesheet and other documentary evidence in support of claim petition. After considering the evidence, learned Tribunal held driver of truck negligent to the extent of 90% and driver of car to the extent of 10% and partly allowed the claim petition directing claimants to recover the amount of Rs.30,55,848/- with interest @ 7.5% with proportionate costs from opponents jointly and severally.
3.3 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, opponent No.4 - Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 21:24:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined Insurance Company - appellant filed the present First Appeal.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the present first appeal has been filed challenging the attribution of 90% negligence on the part of driver of truck. It is further submitted that, as per the map attached to panchnama, Maruti car was being driven in last lane i.e. third lane and the accident occurred when truck entered the main highway from a by-lane. It is submitted that car driver was solely negligent in the occurrence of accident as the other two lanes were open; however, driver of car, did not remain careful while driving car.
5. Learned advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 has supported the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal and submitted that the the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper. Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 21:24:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined
6. I have considered submissions and also perused panchnama, map of the place of accident and FIR. On perusal of map which is part of panchnama, indicates that truck entered the main road from a by-lane and dashed with Maruti Swift Car, which was coming in third lane of the highway. In the cases of negligence, a driver entering the main highway from a by-lane is expected to be more vigilant and carefully. The driver of offending truck failed to do so and did not step into the witness box to depose on the aspect of negligence. When a vehicle is approaching a main road from a by-lane, driver is duty bound to ensure that no vehicle is approaching, particularly in the near vicinity.
7. It appears from the record that driver of truck did not remain vigilant and acted negligently. After considering the materials placed before learned Tribunal, driver of truck was held negligent to the extent of 90% Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 21:24:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined and driver of maruti car was held negligent to the extent of 10%. This findings is based on the evidence available before the learned Tribunal. In absence of any contrary evidence to reduce the percentage of negligence attributed to the truck driver, I am not inclined to agree with the submissions canvassed by learned advocate for the appellant. Hence, I do not find any justifiable reason to disturb the ratio of negligence attributed to both drivers. Accordingly, present First Appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.
8. Record and proceedings, if any, received, be sent back to the concerned Court/Tribunal (D. M. DESAI,J) MANOJ Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by MANOJ KUMAR(HC01092) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 21:24:57 IST 2025