Mohmmadbhai Bhikhabhai Mandli vs Laljibhai Punjabhai Merani
2022 Latest Caselaw 2152 Guj

      C/FA/5025/2008                         ORDER DATED: 23/02/2022



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5025 of 2008
=======================================
    MOHMMADBHAI BHIKHABHAI MANDLI & 1 other(s)
                          Versus
        LALJIBHAI PUNJABHAI MERANI & 2 other(s)
=======================================
Appearance:
MR MAKBUL I MANSURI(2694) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
(MR PM VYAS)(997) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
MR HIREN P VYAS(2269) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MS SEJAL H VYAS(3211) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
=======================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA

                       Date : 23/02/2022
                        ORAL ORDER

1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by judgment and order

dated 10.09.2007 passed in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.

31 of 2006 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Asst.) &

Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 1, Viramgam, the

original claimants has filed present First Appeal under the

provisions of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1881. ( for

short, " the Act").

2) The original claim was at Rs.3,00,000/- claimed on the

ground of untimely death of deceased Aminaben Bhikhabhai in a

vehicular accident occurred on 12.02.2006.

      C/FA/5025/2008                            ORDER DATED: 23/02/2022



3)    Upon service of notice, respondents Nos. 1 to 3 i.e. driver

and the owner appeared before the Tribunal and filed written

statement below exhibit 11. The main contention that was

raised in the said written statement that since claimant and

deceased were residing at Bajana and her name is in the voter

list, and hence, Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the

claim petition. The respondent No.3 Insurance Company has

also filed written statement at exhibit 15, wherein, all possible

defense were taken. The Tribunal, after having considered the

pleadings and the evidence on record framed the issues

including the issue of territorial jurisdiction.

4) The Tribunal, thereafter, considering the submissions and

the material produced on record, came to the conclusion that

Tribunal has no jurisdiction and thereby ultimately vide

judgment and award dated 10.09.2007 rejected the claim

petition on the ground of territorial jurisdiction without there

being any further discussion of quantum.

5) Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid, the original claimant

has approached this Court by way of this appeal.

      C/FA/5025/2008                              ORDER DATED: 23/02/2022



6)    I have heard Mr. Makul I. Mansuri, learned advocate

appearing for the appellants and Mr. Nanavati, learned

advocate appearing for the respondent No.3 - Insurance

Company.

7) Mr. Nanavati, learned advocate appearing for the

respondent No.3 Insurance Company has fairly conceded that

the view, with regard to jurisdiction taken by the Tribunal, is not

in accordance with Section 166 of the Act and thereby he has no

objection if the present appeal is allowed and matter be

remanded back with some directions.

8) In view of this candid statement being made by

Mr.Nanavati, learned advocate appearing for the Insurance

Company, this Court without entering into the merits of the case

and simply on the statement being made, incline to pass the

following order:-

" The judgment and award dated 10.09.2007 passed in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 31 of 2006 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Asst.) & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 1, Viramgam is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back for its fresh consideration. The Tribunal shall decide the claim petition as expeditiously as possible preferably within 9 months from today considering that the claim petition is of year

C/FA/5025/2008 ORDER DATED: 23/02/2022

2006. Record and Proceedings is ordered to be sent back forthwith."

(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J) VISHAL MISHRA