Gujarat High Court
Gujarat State Road Transport ... vs Parulben Wd/O Dhavalkumar Umeshbhai ... on 26 June, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2400/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2400 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2400 of 2024
==========================================================
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
PARULBEN WD/O DHAVALKUMAR UMESHBHAI SUTHAR & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 26/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant -
Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (`GSRTC' for short)
under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, being aggrieved
by and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated
20.4.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Vadodara in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.238 of 2018,
by which, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition
by awarding Rs.17,65,000/- with 9% p.a. interest to be paid
to claimant/s, by holding opponents liable, jointly and
severally.
2. The facts of the present appeal are as under :
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2400/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
2.1 That on 21.12.2018, at about 10.15 a.m., the
deceased was going to Adapur from Hathrol by riding his
motorcycle bearing registration no.GJ-31-B-7632, when he
reached in the vicinity of village Charanvanta, the oponent
no.1 driver of S.T.bus bearing registration No.GJ-18Z-1355
had driven the vehicle in rash and negligent manner in
excessive speed and endangered human life and dashed with
the deceased's motorcycle from its opposite side due to which
the deceased fell down on the road and the tyre of the
S.T.bus run over the deceased due to which the deceased was
crushed and both hands were amputated from his body and
the deceased died on the spot due the severe injuries
sustained by him in the said accident.
2.2 The notices were served to the opponents.
Opponents No.1 & 2 filed their written statement at Exh.14
denying all the contentions. Oral as well as documentary
evidence were led before the Tribunal. After hearing the
submissions made by the rival parties, the Tribunal has
partly allowed the claim petition(s) and awarded compensation
as noted above.
2.3 Hence, the GSRTC has filed the present appeal before
this Court.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2400/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
3. Learned advocate Mr.Munshaw for the appellant -
GSRTC has submitted that the accident occurred due to the
negligence of the deceased as he was riding his motorcycle
recklessly at the curvature at Charanvanta bus stop and was
on mobile call and the bus was coming from the opposite
direction in slow speed and on the correct side of the road
and there is no justifiable ground for the learned Tribunal in
holding the bus driver irresponsible, rash and negligent for
the accident. He submitted that at the most, the contributory
negligence on the part of the bus driver and the motorcyclist
should have been awarded and the learned Tribunal has
erred in holding the bus driver 100% negligent for the
accident. He, therefore, submitted that this appeal may be
allowed.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the
learned advocate for the appellant. I have perused the record
and proceedings. I have gone through the impugned judgment
and award passed by the Tribunal. I have also considered
the pleadings of the parties before the Tribunal.
5. From the record, it transpires that the complaint
was filed against the original opponent no.1-driver of the ST
bus and thereafter, after investigation, the chargesheet was
also filed against him, which supports the contentions raised
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2400/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
by the original applicant no.1; the defence of the bus driver-
opponent no.1 is that the bus stopped at charanvanta bus
stop for picking up the passengers and was leaving the bus
stop with passengers and there is a curve near Charanvanta
bus stop from where the deceased came right his motorcycle
while talking on mobile and his entire attention was towards
the mobile and as there was a turning point at the place of
accident, he himself drove his motorcycle rashly with
excessive speed and dashed with the opposite side of the bus;
however, this version cannot be accepted in view of the fact
that from the inquest panchanama drawn at Exh.22, it is
seen that the head of the applicant was crushed and both
his hands were amputated in the accident, which injuries
could not be caused if the deceased himself dashed with the
bus. Hence, it cannot be said that the motorcyclist was
negligent for the accident and the learned Tribunal has
rightly held the driver of the bus 100% negligent for the
accident.
7. No other contentions are raised by the learned
advocate for the appellant except the above contention on the
point of negligence.
8. In view of the above, no substance is found in the
submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant. The
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2400/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2024
undefined
appeal, therefore, deserves to be dismissed.
8. In view of above, the following order is passed.
8.1. The present appeal is dismissed with no order as
to costs.
8.2. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. The
amount lying with the Tribunal and/or in the FDR, pursuant
to the order of this Court if any, shall be disbursed to the
claimant, along with accrued interest thereon if any, by
account payee cheque, after proper verification and after
following due procedure, within a period of six weeks from
today.
8.3. Record and proceedings be sent back to the
concerned Tribunal, forthwith.
9. Civil application does not survive in view of the
above order and hence disposed of accordingly.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
SRILATHA
