National Insurance Co Ltd vs Mahendrabhai Narendrabhai Patel
2021 Latest Caselaw 7570 Guj

       C/CA/598/2021                                         ORDER DATED: 02/07/2021


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 598 of 2021
                        In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5043 of 2021
==========================================================
                          NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
                                     Versus
                       MAHENDRABHAI NARENDRABHAI PATEL
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VC THOMAS(5476) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ADVOCATE NOT GIVEN for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
MR.KRUTIK A PARIKH(7268) for the Respondent(s) No. 7
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3
RULE UNSERVED(68) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,8
UNSERVED EXPIRED (R)(69) for the Respondent(s) No. 5
==========================================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

                                Date : 02/07/2021

                                       ORAL ORDER

Heard learned advocate Mr.V.C. Thomas for applicant insurance company, learned advocate Mr.G.C. Mazmudar for respondent No.4 and learned advocate Mr.Krutik Parikh for respondent No.7. Though served with the Rule, nobody appears for respondent Nos.1 and 3.

1.1 Learned advocate for the applicant states that respondent No.5 who was Driver, has expired unserved and his presence is not necessary for this application. In similar way, respondent Nos.6 and 8 are not served with the Rule. Learned advocate for the applicant states with regard to them that they are also not necessary parties for this Civil Application as they are owner and insurance company has been appearing.

1.2 Upon this statement, learned advocate for

C/CA/598/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2021

the applicant seeks to delete the said respondent Nos.5, 6, and 8 from the array of the parties.

1.3 The said respondent Nos.5, 6, and 8 shall stand deleted for the purpose of this application as per the request of learned advocate for the applicant, at the cost and consequences of the applicant-insurance company.

2. This application is filed praying to condone delay of 587 days which has taken place in preferring First Appeal against judgment and award dated 23rd April, 2018 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Anand in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.4745 of 2006 (Old No.2423 of 2001).

3. For explaining the passage of time, following dates and events are mentioned.

"5. The applicant humbly submits that, though the date of accident of the present claim petition was on 8-11-1998 and the claim petition filed on 25-10-2001, the learned Tribunal has issued notice to the applicant Insurance Company on 1-08-2017 without any previous reference with regard to MACP at Nadiad and also without a copy of petition, policy and other relevant details and the applicant was impleaded as a party Opponent in the claim petition on 16-03-2018. The matter remained undecided before MACT at Nadiad and later transferred to Anand. It appears that in absence of any record the same remained unattended and unexecuted for want of policy details. In fact the applicant did not get an opportunity to appear before the learned Tribunal for want of details. The learned Tribunal has finally decided the claim petition on 23-04-2018. Nadiad Divisional Office got legal opinion not to file an appeal from its panel advocate. However, the Nadiad Divisional Office has favoured filing of First Appeal, on the ground of petitioner being unauthorised

C/CA/598/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2021

passenger and for reduction in the tenure of interest. Thereafter complete papers were collected. The papers were received by the Regional office at Vadodara on 17-12-2020. The Regional office has put up a detailed note with respect to the entire file and found the company is not liable to pay the compensation as legal issues are involved. Due to the COVID- 19 Lockdown the office was not regularly working for long. Ultimately on 15-01-2021 the papers were sent to the High Court advocate for his opinion and for further action if appeal is necessary. The procedure for getting the receipt of deposit before the Tribunal etc. has consumed some time."

4. It is further submitted that as per the administrative procedure of the insurance company, every decision of filing appeal is required to be confirmed and to be undergone at different procedural levels. Time was also consumed in getting sanction about the court fees amount payable. On the basis of the above facts, it was submitted that there was no negligence on part of the applicant.

5. The events averred in para-5 show that the award was passed ex parte by the Claims Tribunal about which the applicant-insurance company was not aware. This aspect and other aspects mentioned above resulted into passing away of time and the delay occurred.

6. Having regard to the grounds stated, sufficient cause can be said to be made out to condone the delay. Delay of 587 days is condoned.

7. This application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) ANUP