Gujarat High Court
Thakor Chanduji Dolaji vs Patel Nileshbhai Nagerbhai on 10 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1133 of 2010
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1134 of 2010
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
THAKOR CHANDUJI DOLAJI
Versus
PATEL NILESHBHAI NAGERBHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JM BAROT(143) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS KIRAN D PANDEY(3337) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 10/12/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The captioned appeals have been preferred by the appellants against the common impugned judgment and award dated 24.07.2009 passed by the learned Tribunal in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.26 of 2003 and 27 of 2003, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.40,800/- and Rs.77,000/- respectively as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per Page 1 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeals are that the claimants of both the claim petitions namely Thakor Chanduji Dolaji and Thakor Karsanji Dolaji were returning from village Der to Sihi and when they came between village Sihi and Sunak at about 11:00 hours at the place of accident, in the meantime a jeep bearing registration No.GJ-2-X-3198 came from behind and dashed with the claimants. The claimants/appellants- herein sustained grievous injuries and they were taken to the hospital. It is also pleaded before the learned Tribunal that the accident occurred owing to the sole negligence of the driver of the jeep i.e. respondent No.1-herein. It has also been averred that at the time of accident, the claimants were engaged in agricultural work and they were earning Rs.1,500/- per month. In the said accident, they sustained the permanent disability, therefore, they prayed for compensation.
3. On being served, opponent No.1 and 2 i.e. driver and owner of the offending vehicle had chosen not to appear before the learned Tribunal, however, the Insurance Company filed the Page 2 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined written statement at Exh-36 and 40 respectively. The Insurance Company denied the factum of accident, age and income and it has also been pleaded that the vehicles in question were goods vehicles and the passengers are not allowed in it as per the terms of the policy. Even though, the vehicle was being used for carrying the passengers at the time of accident.
4. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues at Exh-13 and 14 respectively in both the claim petitions.
"1. Whether it is proved that the claimants sustained injuries on account of rashness or negligent driving on the part of the driver of vehicle involved in the accident?
2. What amount, if any, the claimant is entitled to receive by way of compensation and from which of the opponent?
3. What order and decree?"
5. In order to prove their respective claims, the claimants/appellants have led the following oral as well as the documentary evidence before the learned Tribunal:-
Sr Particulars Exhibit
No.
1. Affidavit in examination-in-chief 19 and cross-examination of Thakor Chanduji Dolaji (in M.A.C.P. No.26 Page 3 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined of 2003)
2. Affidavit in examination-in-chief 21 and cross-examination of Thakor Karsanji Dolaji (in M.A.C.P. No.27 of 2003) 3. Copy of complaint 24
4. Copy of panchnama of place of 25 accident
5. Copy of R.C. book of offending 27 vehicle
6. Copy of injury certificate of Thakor 28 Chanduji Dolaji
7. Copies of medical bills of Thakor 28 & 47 Chanduji Dolaji
8. Medical certificate of Thakor 29 & 30 Karsanji Dolaji 9. City Scan of Thakor Karsanji Dolaji 31 10. Hemorrhage report of Karsanji 32 11. Bio chemistry report of Karsanji 33 12. Copy of prescription of medicine 34
13. Medical bills of Thakor Karsanji 42 Doalji 14. Disability certificate 43
15. Copy of statement of Thakor 44 & 45 Chanduji Dolaji and Thakor karsanji Dolaji recorded by the investigating officer
16. Injury certificate of Thakor 47 Chanduji Dolaji
17. Disability certificate of Thakor 50 Chanduji Dolaji
18. Disability certificate of Thakor 49 Karsanji Dolaji Page 4 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined
6. Having considered the pleadings, evidence and submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties, the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.40,800/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.26 of 2003 and a sum of Rs.77,000/- in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.27 of 2003 as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
7. While question of fastening the liability to satisfy the award came for consideration, the learned Tribunal had exonerated the Insurance Company of the offending jeep and opponent No.1 and 2/respondent No.1 and 2- herein were held liable to satisfy the award.
8. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the exoneration of the Insurance Company, the claimants of both the claim petitions preferred their respective appeals.
Page 5 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined
9. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
10. Mr. J. M. Barot, learned advocate for the original claimants/appellants-herein, vehemently submitted that it is the case of the claimants throught the trial that the claimants were hit by the jeep bearing registration No.GJ-2-X-3198 while they were walking on the road as respondent No.1-herein the driver of the offending jeep lost the control and thereafter the said jeep turned turtle. He further submitted that the F.I.R was came to be registered by one Naranbhai Chaturbhai. In the said F.I.R, he stated that amongst the other passengers, the Thakore of village Der were also travelling in the jeep. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal relied upon the F.I.R and exonerated the Insurance Company on the ground that at the time of accident the claimants/appellants were travelling in the jeep. However, it is the case of the claimants that they were walking on the road at the time of accident and the jeep hit them and resultantly they sustained injuries. They had also pleaded the said fact in the claim petition and they have also filed the affidavit along with the lines of pleading. He further submitted that both the claimants stepped into the witness box, however, their version was not challenged in cross-examination. Not only this, the Page 6 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined investigating officer had also recorded the statements of both the claimants. The statement of claimant/appellant Thakor Chanduji Dolaji was recorded on 11.05.2002 while the statement of Thakor Karsanji Dolaji was recorded on 17.05.2002. In their respective statements, they stated that while they were walking on the road, the driver of the jeep came with the jeep at an excessive speed and hit them and thereafter the said jeep turned turtle. He further submitted that despite this fact, the learned Tribunal did not believe the version of the claimants and exonerated the Insurance Company on the ground that at the time of accident, the claimants/appellants were travelling in the goods vehicle. He further submitted that when there is some contradiction between the police papers and the version of the claimants, the learned Tribunal ought to have given more weightage to the version of the claimant and oral evidence of the claimant. In support of his contention, learned advocate has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs Chamundeshwari & Ors, reported in 2021 ACJ 2558. Placing reliance upon the aforesaid judgment, learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the present appeal deserves to be allowed and accordingly prayed that Insurance Company be held Page 7 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined liable to satisfy the award.
11. On the other hand, Ms. Kirti S. Pathak, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company, vehemently submitted that at the time of accident, the claimants were travelling in the offending jeep, which is meant for carrying goods, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to satisfy the award and hence, the Insurance Company has rightly been exonerated by the learned Tribunal. She further submitted that so far as the statements of the claimants are concerned, the said statements were recorded after a long time from the date of accident. Therefore, the learned Tribunal had not rightly believed the statement dated 11.05.2002 of Thakor Chanduji Dolaji and 17.05.2002 of Thakor Karsanji Dolaji. She further submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and award, therefore, the present appeal deserves to be rejected.
12. Having considered the submissions of the learned advocates for the parties and having gone through the record, the date of accident, age, income and occupation of the claimants are not under challenge. The claimants have not challenged the impugned judgment and award on the point of Page 8 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined quantum. Learned advocate for the appellant has argued only in respect of the exoneration of the Insurance Company.
13. The Motor Accident Claim Petition No.26 of 2003 and 27 of 2003 came to be filed by the claimants/appellants on the ground that at the time of accident, the claimants/appellants were going to purchase the buffalo and when they returning from it, the offending jeep came from behind at an excessive speed in a rash and negligent manner without blowing the horn and hit both the claimants/appellants from behind. In the said accident, they sustained the grievous injuries and they were taken to the hospital. The FIR at Exh-24 came to be lodged by one Naranbhai Chaturbhai, in the said FIR, he narrated that the accident occurred owing to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of jeep bearing registration No.GJ-2-X-3198. He also stated in the said FIR that at the time of accident, the passengers were travelling in the said jeep and some Thakore of Der village were also sitting in the jeep. He nowhere stated that the very same claimants were sitting in the jeep. The names of the claimants were not mentioned in the entire FIR. The investigating officer, during the course of investigation, also recorded the statements of both the claimants. The statement of Thakor Chanduji Dolaji Page 9 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined came to be recorded on 11.05.2002 while the statement of Thakor Karsanji Dolaji came to be recorded on 17.05.2002. The accident in question took place on 07.05.2002, however, the learned Tribunal disbelieved both the statements on the ground that these statements were recorded after a long time of accident. In my considered view, the learned Tribunal has lost the sight to the fact that both the claimants/appellants sustained grievous injuries and they were admitted in the hospital and they remained admitted in the hospital as an indoor patient for a considerable time. The incident which took place on 07.05.2002, and for which the I.O. recorded the statement on 11.05.2002 and 17.05.2002, in my considered view it is not to be ignored on the ground that the said statements were recorded after a long time. In fact, these statements were recorded in the proximity of time of accident. Medical papers further transpires that Thakore Karsanji Doalji sustained the head injuries and other fracture injuries while the claimant/appellant Thakor Chanduji Dolaji also sustained the grievous injuries and also sustained the multiple fractures.
14. The injury certificate of Thakor Karsanji Dolaji at Exh-30 also transpires that the history given by the Thakore Karsanji Page 10 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined Dolaji to the doctor he stated that he sustained the injuries owing to the over turning of the jeep. In the affidavit of examination-in-chief at Exh-19 and 21, the claimants remained affirmed to their version. They were also cross-examined and they denied the suggestions that at the time of accident they were travelling in the jeep. The Insurance Company has not led any evidence in rebuttal to rebut the version of the claimants/appellants.
15. At this juncture, it would be profitable to refer the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Chamundeshwari (supra), relied by the learned advocate for the appellant, wherein the Apex Court has held that where there is some contradiction between the police papers and the version of the claimants, the oral evidence of the claimant adduced before the learned Tribunal must be given more weightage. Thus, considering the version of the claimant before the learned Tribunal throught and the oral evidence adduced by the claimants/appellants, which is also supported by the statements of the claimants recorded by the I.O., in my considered view sufficient to hold that at the time of accident claimants/appellants were not travelling in the offending vehicle Page 11 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined and hence, the learned Tribunal has committed serious illegality in not accepting the version of the claimants/appellants.
16. It is also on record that the insurance policy of the offending vehicle was proved before the learned Tribunal at Exh-
27. Perusal of the policy transpires that the Insurance Company has charged the premium of Rs.50/- on account of non-fare paying passengers as per IMT No.13 and also charged the premium of Rs.50/- for non-fare paying passengers as per IMT No.14. The Insurance Company had charged the separate premium for the persons employed in connection with the operation of loading and unloading of the motor vehicle IMT 17 and also charged the premium of Rs.75/- for the paid driver. Even if, for the sake of argument if it is presumed that the claimants were travelling in the jeep, even though their claim was covered under the policy as the Insurance Company has charged the premium of Rs.50/- for non-fare paying passengers as per IMT No.13 and Rs.50/- for non-fare paying passengers as per IMT No.14. But the said fact was also ignored by the learned Tribunal.
17. Thus, considering the totality of the fact that the claimants Page 12 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined have successfully proved that at the time of accident they were walking on the road when they were hit from behind by the offending jeep, therefore, the Insurance Company cannot avoid its liability to satisfy the award and accordingly, the captioned appeals are stand allowed partly and all the respondents i.e. driver, owner of the offending jeep and the Insurance Company of the offending jeep are held liable to satisfy the award. The impugned judgment and award is modified to that extent. All the respondents are made liable to satisfy the award jointly and severally.
18. The Insurance Company shall deposit the awarded amount along with the interest within a period of 6 weeks from today.
19. Upon depositing of the said amount, the learned Tribunal shall disburse the amount to the original claimants, after deducting the deficit court fees, if any, and after due verification.
20. Amount, if any, lying deposited with the Registry of this Court, the same be transmitted to the concerned learned Tribunal forthwith.
Page 13 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1133/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined
21. R & P, if any, be sent back to the concerned learned Tribunal forthwith. No order as to costs.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) CDP Page 14 of 14 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:49:13 IST 2025