Gujarat High Court
Parulben Wd/O Maheshbhai Lakhubhai ... vs Rathod Rajeshkumar Mohanbhai on 17 September, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3259/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/09/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3259 of 2011
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
PARULBEN WD/O MAHESHBHAI LAKHUBHAI PARGHI & ORS.
Versus
RATHOD RAJESHKUMAR MOHANBHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MTM HAKIM(1190) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MR JIGAR G GADHAVI(5613) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
MR KRUNAL R SAKSENA(5915) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 17/09/2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant-Union of
India under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, being
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3259/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/09/2024
undefined
aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and award
dated 19.12.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, (Main) Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar in Motor
Accident Claim Petition No.629 of 2006, by which, the
learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition of the
claimants.
2. The facts of the present appeals are as under :
2.1 The claimant/s filed the claim petition stating that on
29.5.2006, deceased Maheshbhai and injured Lalitkumer both
were going towards Khedbrahmma from Idar on motorcycle
No.GJ.9AB.9122 and deceased Mahesbhai was driving the said
motorcycle and injured Lalitbhai was sitting as pillion rider
and when they were passing near Gambhirpura three roads
had stopped their motocycle on road side and talking on
mobile phone at that time opponent no.1-driver of the
involved jeep no.GJ.9M.6113 came from behind and dashed to
the motorcycle as a result of which they dashed to the
involved tempo no.GJ.16T.6389 which was coming from the
opposite side due to which deceased Maheshbhai had
sustained fatal injuries and died due to the said vehicular
accidental injuries and injured Lalitkumar has sustained
injuries as mentioned in the medical certificate.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3259/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/09/2024
undefined
2.2 Therefore, two claim petitions were filed before the
learned Tribunal; one by the heirs and legal representatives
by the deceased Maheshbhai and one by the injured
claimant-Lalitkumar.
3. Notices were issued to the opponents, written
statements were filed by some of the opponents, the issues
were framed by the Tribunal. Oral as well as documentary
evidence were led before the Tribunal. After hearing the
submissions made by the rival parties, the Tribunal has
dismissed the claim petition filed by the legal representatives
of the deceased Maheshbhai, which is challenged by way of
this appeal by the claimants challenging the negligence aspect
only,
4. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned
advocate for the appellants has pointed out that the common
judgment and award was passed in MACP No.629 of 2006
and 789 of 2006. The judgment and award passed in MACP
No.789 of 2006 was challenged by way of filing First Appeal
No.2931 of 2010 on the ground of negligence which was
dismissed by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
30.12.2010.
5. As this appeal is also filed challenging the same
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3259/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/09/2024
undefined
common judgment and award on the point of negligence only,
without discussing anything on the aspect of negligence, on
the principle of res judicata, this appeal also deserves to be
dismissed. Accordingly, dismissed.
6. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned
Tribunal, forthwith.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
SRILATHA
