Bhikhabhai Keshavlal Mevada vs Kunvarben Punjabhai Parmar
2023 Latest Caselaw 2702 Guj

      C/FA/4704/2019                            ORDER DATED: 31/03/2023




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4704 of 2019
                            With
     CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR PRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL
                   EVIDENCES) NO. 1 of 2021
                              In
               R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4704 of 2019
                            With
              R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 48 of 2021
                              In
                FIRST APPEAL NO. 4704 of 2019
=============================================
                       BHIKHABHAI KESHAVLAL MEVADA
                                  Versus
                       KUNVARBEN PUNJABHAI PARMAR
=============================================
Appearance:
MS. PAYAL M TUVAR(7055) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR KK THAKKAR(2834) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR.MANAN BHATT(6535) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
=============================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                            Date : 31/03/2023

                          COMMON ORAL ORDER

1. Ms. Payal M. Tuvar, learned advocate for the appellant, submits that appellant is the owner of Maruti Car No.GJ-08-A- 3850, who has challenged the judgment and award dated 15.04.2019 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.240 of 2006 stating that the said award and judgment is required to be recalled, since the learned Tribunal has failed to consider the fact that the appellant being the owner of the Maruti Car was holding the valid driving license. Learned advocate Ms. Tuvar further submitted that the said fact could be proved in MACP No.225 of 2006, which was decided on 28.03.2022, where the

C/FA/4704/2019 ORDER DATED: 31/03/2023

present appellant himself was a claimant. Learned advocate Ms. Tuvar submitted that the license of the owner of the vehicle could have been brought on record by the Tribunal by calling from the details of Form No.54 from the Investigating Officer in case the owner or the driver of the vehicle failed to produce any evidence on record.

2. While countering the argument, learned advocate Mr. Rituraj Meena for the Insurance Company submitted that in the earlier judgment in MACP No.240 of 2006 the Insurance Company has been exonerated and though the present appellant was a party to the matter, he had failed to produce any license on record and now he cannot be heard, since the MACP No.225 of 2006 has been decided later on by the Tribunal on 28.03.2022.

3. Learned advocate Mr. K. K. Thakkar submits that the Cross-Objection No.48 of 2021 has been filed against the First Appeal No.4704 of 2019, as the owner of the Jeep No.GJ-9-H- 48 since the contributory negligence aspect has not been in accordance with evidence on record.

4. Civil Application No.1 of 2021 is for production of the additional evidence, where learned advocate Ms. Tuvar states that it is the copy of the license, which the owner of the present appellant has produced showing the fact that he was holding a valid license on the date of the accident being the owner and driver of Maruti Car No. GJ-08-A-3850.

5. The fact of the license of the appellant has been

C/FA/4704/2019 ORDER DATED: 31/03/2023

appreciated in MACP No.225 of 2006 and when the license has been proved in MACP No.225 of 2006, this matter is required to be remanded so as appellant would get an opportunity to adduce the evidence and further the owner of the other counter offending vehicle i.e. Jeep No. GJ-9-H-48 could also agitates the negligence aspect. All the parties on record and even the Insurance Company would have an opportunity to defend the matter.

6. Hence, the final order and judgment passed in MACP No.240 of 2006 stands quashed and set aside. The MACP No.240 of 2006 is ordered to be restored back on the file of the concerned Tribunal and all the parties including the claimant would have right to adduce evidence on record. Let the Tribunal issue Notice to the claimant informing about the Motor Accident Claim Petition being restored on the file. The Tribunal, thus, is directed to record the evidence and dispose it within the period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of the writ of this matter with full opportunity to be granted to all the parties concerned for adducing the evidence.

7. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant has deposited the money in accordance to the award passed in MACP No.240 of 2006, the same may be considered while passing the final judgment and award.

(GITA GOPI,J) T. J. Bharwad