Gujarat High Court
Imran Salim Nareja Being Minor Through ... vs Ishwarbhai Bhachubhai Dekabhai Mata on 1 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2884 of 2025
==========================================================
IMRAN SALIM NAREJA BEING MINOR THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN
GRANDFATHER IBRAHIMBHAI RAMJUBHAI NAREJA
Versus
ISHWARBHAI BHACHUBHAI DEKABHAI MATA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Respondent(s) No. 6
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Respondent(s) No. 6
MS KARUNA V RAHEVAR(3818) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 4,7
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 01/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Nishit A. Bhalodi, learned advocate on record for the petitioner-original claimant.
2. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court vide order dated 07.03.2025, learned advocate Mr. G.C. Mazmudar has entered his appearance on behalf of respondent no.6 and learned advocate Ms. Karuna Rahevar has entered her appearance on behalf of respondent no.3-Insurance Company. Notice has been duly served upon respondent nos.4 and 7, however, no appearance has been entered.
Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 undefined
3. Noticing the prayer sought for in the present petition and the judgment relied upon by learned advocate for the petitioner, the matter is taken up for hearing with the assistance of learned advocates for the respective parties.
4. The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, at the instance of the original claimant praying for following reliefs, which read as under:
"(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to admit and
allow this petition.
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to pass an appropriate direction by quashing and setting aside the order below Exh.1 dated 08/10/2024 and allow the petitioner to continue to proceed his MACP No.601/2023 before the Ld. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Bhuj.
(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to stay the order dated 08/10/2024 below Exh.1 in MACP No.601/2023 (D) xxxxx"
5. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the applicant had approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhuj by preferring the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (for short, "the Act, 1988") on 20.12.2023, which was Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 undefined registered as M.A.C.P. No.601 of 2023. Initially, the owner and the driver of the vehicle, though being joined in the claim petition, the Tribunal suo moto directed the deletion of the owner and the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident. The applicant had, therefore, on 08.10.2024 moved an application at (Exh.20) to rejoin the aforesaid deleted respondents. The prayer was sought for to issue process upon the aforesaid proposed respondent nos.1, 2 and 5. While hearing of the aforesaid application, the Tribunal, noticing the fact that the accident had taken place within territorial jurisdiction of Anjar Taluka, had passed the impugned order of returning the petition, so as to present it before the appropriate Tribunal by invoking the provisions of Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 5.1 Learned advocate has further submitted that the aforesaid impugned order is illegal, and is required to be quashed and set aside, as the same is dehors the legal provision, more particularly, Section 166 (2) of the Act, 1988. The reliance was placed on the unreported decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Hemraj Singh Rasun Singh Versus Sanjit Yadav S/O Naresh Yadav & Anr (Common Oral Order dated 23.10.2024 passed in Special Civil Application No. 11691 of 2024 and allied matters). This Court, upon appreciation of the aforesaid provision, in light of the decision of the Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 undefined Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malati Sardar vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. reported in (2016 ACJ 542), has deprecated the approach of the Tribunal of resorting to such hyper-technical approach of returning the claim petition without understanding the provisions of the Act, 1988.
5.2 By referring to the relevant observations of this Court in the aforesaid decision, learned advocate has urged this Court to restore the claim petition to its original file before the concerned Tribunal by quashing and setting aside the impugned order passed below Exh.1. He has also urged this Court to pass any further order, more particularly, the application being moved seeking rejoining of the opponent nos.1, 3 and 5, to be considered afresh.
6. Learned advocates appearing for the respective respondents- Insurance Companies have objected to the aforesaid submissions, and have supported the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal.
7. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having perused the impugned order passed below Exh.1, it appears that at the stage of hearing of the application preferred by the original claimant at Exh.20 seeking rejoining of opponent nos.1, 2 Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 undefined and 5, the Court having noted the fact that the aforesaid opponents being the owner and driver of the vehicle involved having their offices at Taluka Anjar, Kutchchh, and the original claim petition being preferred in the month of December-2023, the Tribunal at Anjar was the competent Court to hear and decide the claim petition. The Tribunal had also noticed the fact that out of total seven parties to the proceedings, three opponents along with the applicant, are residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Anjar Taluka, and therefore,the claim petition being preferred atBhuj, was not maintainable, and therefore, has proceeded to pass the order of return of petition by invoking the Order VII Rule 10 of the Code.
8. Having noted the aforesaid findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal, while returning the claim petition, in light of the provisions, more particularly, Section 166(2) of the Act, 1988, which provides the application to be preferred for compensation gives an option to the claimant either to apply before claim tribunal having jurisdiction over the area in which the accident occurred or within the claim tribunal within whose local jurisdiction, the claimant resides or carries on business or within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the defendant resides. Thus, the claimant has been given an option to move the appropriate application before the concerned Tribunal. In the facts of Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 undefined the present case, it is evident from the cause title of the petition, that respective respondents- Insurance Companies are having their head offices at Bhuj, Kutchchh.
9. This Court in the case of Hemraj Singh (supra) has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malati Sardar (supra). Upon considering the relevant observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision, the Court had taken into consideration the fact that the Insurance Company, which was the main contesting respondent had its business at Calcutta (Kolkata), noticing the benevolent legislation for the victims of the accident and the negligent driving, the Court had consistently held that the provision for territorial jurisdiction has to be interpreted with the object of facilitating the remedies for the victims of the accidents. The Court has observed that hyper-technical approach in such matters ought to be avoided, if there is no bar to a claim petition being filed at a place, where the Insurance Company, which is the main contesting party, has its business, no prejudice or any failure of justice is likely to be there.
10. Applying the aforesaid principles in the facts of the case, as noted earlier, contesting respondents mainly the Insurance Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 undefined Companies joined as defendants in the original claim petition are having their head offices at Bhuj, Kutchchh. Hence, the Tribunal while passing the impugned order of returning the plaint, committed serious error in law by ignoring the aforesaid settled legal position and the provision.
11. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 08.10.2024 passed by the learned 8th Additional District Judge (MACT Auxliliary), Bhuj, below Exh.1 in M.A.C.P. No.601 of 2023, is hereby quashed and set aside. The original claim petition is directed to be restored to its original file. The Tribunal is at liberty to proceed with proceedings in accordance with law.
12. At this stage, learned advocate on record for the petitioner has submitted that since the claim petition has been revived, appropriate directions may be issued to the Tribunal to hear the application filed at Exh.20 in accordance with law. The attention of this Court was invited to the order dated 08.10.2024 passed below such application, wherein the Tribunal has not decided the aforesaid application, in view of return of the claim petition, to be presented before the appropriate Tribunal by the impugned order.
Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2884/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 undefined
13. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned advocate for the petitioner and having perused the order dated 08.10.2024 passed below Exh.1, since original claim petition has been restored, the Tribunal is directed to decide the aforesaid application afresh strictly in accordance with law.
14. The certified copy of the order dated 08.10.2024 is permitted to be replaced at page No.16.
15. With these observation, present petition stands disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 01 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 02 03:41:12 IST 2025