Gujarat High Court
United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Ashish Samjubhai Makka on 18 September, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3280/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3280 of 2022
==========================================================
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
Versus
ASHISH SAMJUBHAI MAKKA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAULIK J SHELAT(2500) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR CHINTAN S POPAT(5004) for the Defendant(s) No. 4
MR. KIRTAN H MISTRY(10012) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Defendant(s) No. 5.1,5.2,5.3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 18/09/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant -
original respondent No.5 - Insurance Company of the
Motorcycle bearing registration No.GJ-11-DD-4703 being
aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and
award dated 06.04.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Aux.), Keshod in Motor Accident Claim Petition
No.156 of 2017, by which the Tribunal has awarded
compensation of Rs.2,27,800/- with 7.5% per annum interest
to the claimant/s, holding opponents No.1 to 5 i.e.
driver/owner and insurance company of the Rickshaw bearing
registration No.GJ-11-V-1259 and driver, owner and insurance
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3280/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
company of the Motorcycle bearing registration No.GJ-11-DD-
4703, respectively, liable, jointly and severally.
2. Heard learned advocates.
3. It transpires that the only ground raised by the
appellant - insurance company by way of this appeal would
be that though it has led sufficient evidence to prove its
defence that insured motorcycle rider was not holding driving
license to driver motorcycle but the Tribunal has not dealt
with the said defense.
4. From the record, this Court finds that the
appellant has examined police personnel at Exh.62, who has
confirmed that the motorcyclist has deposited penalty for
breach of Section 181 of the M.V. Act. The statement of the
motorcyclist (Exh.68) also confirmed that he was not holding
driving license. Further, the appellant has called upon the
driver and owner of the motorcycle to produce the driving
licence (Exh.65), but they have failed to produce the same.
Even the R.T.O. vide its letter dated 20.12.2019 (Exh.59)
confirmed that after verifying its record, it could not find the
driving licence of the motorcyclist. Though all these evidence
are on record, the Tribunal has not taken into consideration
the same and is failed to decide the issue of driving licence.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3280/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
The driver and owner of the motorcycle are unable to
controvert the above facts.
5. In view of above, the ends of justice would meet
if the matter be remanded back to the concerned Tribunal to
decide the only issue of liability of the appellant - insurance
company, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the
case, after giving proper opportunity to the parties, without
prejudice to the earlier order passed by it and by this Court,
on or before 31.03.2025, in accordance with law. Order
accordingly.
6. Learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties have no objection. The parties shall cooperate the
proceedings before the Tribunal and will not ask for any
unnecessary adjournment.
7. This appeal stands disposed of. Record and
proceedings, if any, be sent to the concerned Tribunal,
forthwith.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
M.H. DAVE
