United India Insurance Company ... vs Thakorbhai Melabhai Parmar
2023 Latest Caselaw 808 Guj

     C/FA/3419/2017                                  ORDER DATED: 01/02/2023




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3419 of 2017
==========================================================
              UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED.
                                Versus
               THAKORBHAI MELABHAI PARMAR & 5 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR R G DWIVEDI(6601) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Defendant(s) No. 4,5
MR CHIRAYU A MEHTA(3256) for the Defendant(s) No. 6
MR H M SHAH(3997) for the Defendant(s) No. 2,3
MR KUNAL S SHAH(5282) for the Defendant(s) No. 2,3
MR MOHSIN M HAKIM(5396) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                              Date : 01/02/2023

                               ORAL ORDER

1. By way of present appeal, the appellant herein is aggrieved by the order passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Aux) Vadodara in MACP No. 457 of 2008 dated 27.2.2017.

2. It is the case of the appellant herein that the learned tribunal has erred by closing the stage of the appellant to cross-examine the claimant. It is submitted that due to transfer of one of the cases from the Court of one Presiding Officer to another, the learned advocate for the appellant was not aware about the status of the case and hence so could not attend the proceedings on that day. No fresh Notice was also issued for the advocate appearing for the appellant to know about the

C/FA/3419/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2023

proceedings pending before the said Court. On the aforesaid ground, Mr. R.G. Dwivedi, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the impugned order passed by the tribunal is required to be quashed and set-aside and the matter is required to be remanded back for the appellant herein to cross-examine the claimant.

3. Mr. Chirayu Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.6 Insurance Company was not in a position to controvert the submission made by the learned advocate for the appellant.

4. Heard learned advocate for the respective parties. In view of this Court, the impugned judgment and order is not being interfered with. Mr. Dwivedi, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the amount of compensation granted by the tribunal amounting to Rs.1,94,545/- in due compliance of the direction of the Tribunal has been deposited and the same is disbursed in favour of the claimant.

5. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the judgment and order of compensation and the matter is remanded back to the tribunal from the stage of cross-examination of the claimant.

C/FA/3419/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2023

6. The interest of justice would be served if the appellant is permitted to cross-examine the claimant and the tribunal may pass appropriate order considering the evidence on record to decide inter-se liability of the appellant Insurance Company and respondent No.6. This Court has otherwise not opined on the merits and the tribunal may consider the same in accordance with law independently. The claimant i.e. respondent No.1 is permitted to withdraw the 70% of the amount lying in FDR in terms of order dated 6.8.2018.

The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) SAJ GEORGE