Gujarat High Court
Gujarat State Road Transport ... vs Badiben Alias Badidevi Bhanaji Bhagora on 7 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1023/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1023 of 2021
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
=============================================
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
BADIBEN ALIAS BADIDEVI BHANAJI BHAGORA & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MS VYOMA K JHAVERI(6386) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR R.K.MANSURI(3205) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 12
RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 9
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 07/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Ms. Vyoma Jhaveri, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. R.K. Mansuri, learned advocate for the respondent nos 1 to 8. Rule has remained unserved upon defendant no.9, who is the owner of the Tempo involved in the accident. Rule is not received back qua respondent no.12 who is the driver of the ST Bus. With the assistance of the learned advocate for the appellant, the matter was taken up for final hearing. Noticing the fact that the appeal of the year 2021 is pending for adjudication in absence of the respondent nos. 9 and 1, the hearing was concluded.
2. Noticing the limited issue involved, learned advocate for the appellant, at the outset, has invited attention of this Court Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Feb 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Feb 11 22:14:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1023/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined to the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, whereby, the claim petition preferred by the respondents- original claimants was partly allowed thereby determining amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.2,49,500/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim petition till realization along with proportionate costs. By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has held driver of the present appellant Corporation 100% negligent. According to the learned advocate for appellant, the driver of the Tempo involved in the accident was equally negligent, however the driver and the owner of the Tempo were deleted from the array of the parties, pursuant to the order passed below Exh.1 and Exh.26. The reliance was placed on the evidence of the driver of the ST Corporation in support of such submission. During the course of argument, learned advocate has submitted that though respondents driver and owner of the vehicle have been deleted from the array of the parties, however, the driver of the Tempo was not holding the license. She has therefore, submitted that in absence of the necessary parties, the Tribunal had shifted the liability upon the appellant Corporation. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and award, the present appeal is preferred disputing their liability. She has therefore, urged to allow the present appeal.
3. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellant and having pursed the impugned judgment and award, indisputably the original application is preferred under Section 163 A of the Motor Vehicles Act. Section 163-A of the Act reads as under:
Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Feb 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Feb 11 22:14:27 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1023/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined "Section 163-A: A Special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis:
(1). Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be.
Explanation: For the purposes of this sub-section, "permanent disability" shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
(2). In any claim for compensation under sub- section (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person.
(3). The Central Government may, keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time amend the Second Schedule."
3.1. The Tribunal upon appreciation of the aforesaid Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Feb 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Feb 11 22:14:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1023/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined provisions has noticed that as per sub-Section (2) of Section 163-A in a scheme for compensation under sub-section (1), the claimant is neither required to plead or establish wrongful act or neglect or default of owner of the vehicle or the vehicle concerned or any other person. The Tribunal has further noticed that sub-section (1) of Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act starts with non-obstante clause and thus it gives the overriding effect of the special provision over other provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act for as much as any other law for the time being in force. Ms. Jhaveri, learned advocate for the appellant has fairly conceded that Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is a special provision where the claimant is not required to plead or establish that death was due to the wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner. In opinion of this Court, once the claimant has established the fact before the Tribunal with regard to use of motor vehicle and the injuries sustained resulting into permanent disablement or death, then as per structure formula as indicated in Second Schedule, the claimant is entitled to the compensation. Also, the involvement of ST Bus in the accident is not in dispute. Thus, the appellant ST Corporation being owner of the vehicle involved is liable to pay compensation.
4. Considering the aforesaid legal provision and in light of the observations made by the Tribunal, in the opinion of this Court, no error can be found with the approach of the learned Judge in fixing the liability of the appellant Corporation to pay the compensation to the respondents claimants. The present appeal being devoid of merits, not raising any question of law and fact, is not entertained and is hereby dismissed.
Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Feb 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Feb 11 22:14:27 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1023/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined
5. Noticing the order dated 4.3.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench in captioned First Appeal, whereby, 70% of the awarded amount is directed to be invested in the fixed deposit. In view of disposal of the captioned appeal, the Tribunal is directed to release the remaining 70% of the amount lying in the fixed deposit in favour of the original claimants subject to due verification within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
With these observations, present appeal stands dismissed.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Feb 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Feb 11 22:14:27 IST 2025