Gujarat High Court
Pankajbhai Kasturbhai Chaudhary vs Ramsing Dhanabhai Vasava on 12 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1649/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1649 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2750 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1655 of 2025
In
F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2725 of 2025
==========================================================
PANKAJBHAI KASTURBHAI CHAUDHARY
Versus
RAMSING DHANABHAI VASAVA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KV GADHIA(319) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 12/09/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Hiren Modi, learned advocate on record for the applicant- original claimant/ owner of the insured vehicle. Learned advocate Mr. K.V. Gadhia has entered appearance on behalf of respondent no.4-Insurance Company. Despite service of notice of rule upon respondent nos.1 to 3, no appearance has been entered on their behalf.
2. Considering the limited prayer sought for, the present application is taken up for hearing, in absence of the said respondents, Page 1 of 7 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 08:07:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1649/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025 undefined with the assistance of learned advocates on record for the respective parties.
3. The present application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, praying for condonation of delay of 740 days caused in preferring the appeal.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant has mainly relied upon the averments made in the application, and has submitted that looking to the controversy involved, the applicant had appeared before the Tribunal in the original claim proceedings, and had filed written statement objecting to the case of the original claimant at Exh.19, inter alia, disputing the averments made in the claim petition, by challenging the occurrence of accident, the involvement of the offending vehicle, the injuries and the resultant death of the deceased as well as the age and the income of the deceased. It was submitted that the driving license of the opponent no.1 was handed over to the Insurance Company with bona fide impression that offending vehicle is insured with opponent no.2-Insurance Company. The heavy reliance was placed on the Insurance Company to take care of the proceedings. Though, the applicant was represented by a lawyer before the Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 08:07:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1649/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025 undefined Tribunal; however, the applicant was not made aware about the final judgment and award being passed by the Tribunal on 20.10.2022, thereby, issuing directions of pay and recovery against the owner of the vehicle-applicant herein. It was only when the recovery proceedings were initiated by the respondent no.4-Insurance Company by preferring execution proceedings, wherein warrant was served. Thereafter, the applicant derived knowledge about the aforesaid judgment and award being passed by the Tribunal. 4.1 Referring to the aforesaid events, learned advocate has submitted that there was no gross inaction or negligency on the part of the applicant. Considering the final directions issued by the Tribunal, an opportunity may be extended to the applicant, who has otherwise good case on merits. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to take liberal approach, and to condone the delay, as the same has been caused for bona fide reasons.
4.2 Lastly, learned advocate has submitted that appropriate conditions may be imposed, while condoning the delay.
5. Learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.4-Insurance Company has forcefully objected to the aforesaid submissions of Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 08:07:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1649/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025 undefined learned advocate for the applicant. The reliance was placed on the affidavit-in-reply filed, objecting to condonation of delay. The attention of this Court was invited to the fact that the applicant had participated in the proceedings before the Tribunal, wherein the claim petition was objected by filing written statement. The applicant was represented by a lawyer. Learned advocate has, therefore, submitted that it can safely be inferred that the applicant was aware about the final judgment and award being pronounced in the year-2022. 5.1 Learned advocate has further drawn my attention to the issue involved, and has submitted that in absence of any valid and effective driving license not in force, the Tribunal has rightly followed the principles laid down in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Swaran Singh & Ors reported in 2004 (3) SCC 297 as well as in the case of Pappu and Ors. Vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba and Anr. reported in 2018 TAC 360 SC, in the facts of the case, thereby arrived at a conclusion of issuing appropriate directions of pay and recovery. It was pointed out that the applicant himself is the driver-cum-owner of the insured vehicle. In such circumstances, no error can be found with the approach of the Tribunal in issuing such directions.
5.2 Referring to the aforesaid merits of the case, learned advocate
Page 4 of 7
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 08:07:46 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1649/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
has submitted that there being no merits in the appeal, this Court may otherwise also not exercise its discretion and condone the huge delay of 740 days caused in preferring the appeal.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned advocates for the respective parties, in light of the averments made in the application being deposed on oath, on close perusal of the averments made in the application, it is evident that the impugned judgment and award was pronounced on 20.10.2022. Indisputably, the applicant was represented through a lawyer, who had tendered the written statement on his behalf objecting to the claim petition. The issue of non-existence of the license was examined by the Tribunal, wherein appreciating the evidence brought on record, more particularly, the driving license of the applicant being produced on record through the Insurance Company at Exh.56, the Court has opined that there did not exist any valid and effective driving license at the time of occurrence of accident.
7. Considering the grounds raised in the appeal memo, the applicant intends to challenge the aforesaid findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal on the touchstone of the interpretation of Section 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, more particularly, sub-
Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 08:07:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1649/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025 undefined
section 2(b) of Section 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is found that the applicant was not made aware about the impugned judgment and award being pronounced by the learned advocate, who represented him before the Tribunal.
8. During the course of hearing, it was pointed out that a show cause notice issued by the Tribunal in the execution proceedings, was made returnable on 24.07.2024 and thereafter, the applicant had appeared before the Tribunal on the first date of hearing. The applicant in the application, has averred on oath that they applied for certified copy on 14.10.2024, which was received by them on 15.10.2024. Since the statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- was required to be deposited before pursuing the remedy of appeal before the concerned Tribunal, further time was consumed in making the arrangement of funds in this regard. Ultimately, the present appeal was submitted before the Registry of this Court on 21.01.2025 along with the application for condonation of delay, which was presented on 27.01.2025 and registered on 13.03.2025.
9. Noticing the aforesaid dates and the challenge being made, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretion, in order to extend an opportunity to the applicant to argue his case on merits. However, Page 6 of 7 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 08:07:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1649/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025 undefined noticing the number of days of delay involved, the present application seeking condonation of delay of 740 days caused in preferring the appeal, is hereby allowed, on condition that the costs of Rs. 10,000/- be deposited with the Registry of this Court before registration of the First Appeal.
10. With these observations, the present Civil Application stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
11. Registry is directed to reflect the name of learned advocate Mr. K.V. Gadhia appearing for the respondent no.4-Insurance Company in the main appeal.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA/SFS/12/09 Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 08:07:46 IST 2025