Gujarat High Court
Rajeshbhai R. Patel vs Gitaben Sureshbhai Chauhan on 2 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3935/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3935 of 2024
================================================================
RAJESHBHAI R. PATEL & ANR.
Versus
GITABEN SURESHBHAI CHAUHAN & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 02/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This Appeal is filed challenging the judgment and award
dated 16.11.2022 passed by learned 4th Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Aux), Ankleshwar at Bharuch in Motor Accident
Claim Petition No.93 of 2017.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nishit A. Bhalodi for
appellants.
3. The brief facts narrated in the petition are as under:
3.1. On 25/02/2016, deceased was returning his home on his
Motorcycle bearing registration No. GJ-16-AL-5232 after
completing his duty. When he reached between Pungaam to
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3935/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
Nagal, one Tempo bearing Registration No.GJ-16-X-6354 was
parked on the road side by opponent No.1 without any
indicator or signal. Resultantly, motorcyclist dashed with the
said Tempo from behind and sustained serious injuries and
thereafter, he was admitted in Global Hospital and ultimately
he succumbed due to injuries sustained in the accident. F.I.R.
being No.CR-1-17 of 2016 was registered against the driver of
the tempo at Ankleshwar Rural Police Station. Thereafter,
legal heirs of deceased filed Motor Accident Claim Petition
No.93 of 2017 before the learned Tribunal claiming
compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- against the opponents.
Notices were issued and the same were duly served. Though
opponents were represented by learned advocates, however
did not file any Written Statement. Issues were framed.
Claimant No.1, mother of the deceased filed examination-in-
chief at Exhibit-11. Claimant No.2 was also examined at
Exhibit-31. Claimants produced documentary evidence such
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3935/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
as FIR, Spot Panchnama, Post Mortem Report and other
documentary evidences in support the claim petition. After
considering the oral as well as documentary evidence and
material placed on record, learned Tribunal partly allowed
claim petition by directing opponents to pay Rs.22,17,712/-
with 9% interest from the date of claim petition till the date of
realization.
3.2 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and award, the appellants-original opponents have
filed the present First Appeal before this Court.
4. Learned advocate for the appellants has submitted that
findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal on the aspect of
negligence is erroneous. It is further submitted that the
motorcyclist was in a drunken condition and the Investigating
Officer and Doctor in collusion with claimants, have
suppressed the fact that deceased was under the influence of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3935/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
alcohol at the time of accident. It is further submitted that
Panchnama of the place of accident clearly indicates that the
motorcyclist was rash and negligent and because of his
negligence, accident had occurred. It is further submitted that
tempo was parked on the side of the road and not on the road
and since the driver of the tempo was not negligent in the
occurrence of accident, learned Tribunal ought not to have
held opponent Nos.1 and 2 liable to pay compensation. Except
above submissions, no other submissions are made by learned
advocate for the appellants. A copy of FIR is placed on record
which is taken on record.
5. Having considered the submissions of the learned
advocate for the appellants and considering the facts which
culled out from the impugned award is that the accident had
occurred in the midnight. Deceased dashed with a tanker
which was parked on the road without any signal or indicator.
FIR also indicates that the driver of tanker was negligent. The
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3935/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
findings of learned Tribunal is supported by the fact that
despite notices were issued to opponents, they have remained
absent by not filing Written Statement and also by not cross-
examining the claimants on all grounds. Conduct of opponents
by not contesting the claim petition clearly gives rise to a
presumption that allegations of negligence which has been
made by claimants are accepted by the owner and driver of
tanker, the contention which has been raised by the learned
advocate for the appellants that deceased was under the
influence of alcohol, is not supported by any evidence. In
absence of material being placed before learned Tribunal,
findings of negligence and other grounds are legal and did not
require any interference.
6. In view of the above stated facts, the present First
Appeal lacks merits and deserves to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the present First Appeal stands dismissed at an
admission stage.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3935/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
7. Lastly, learned advocate for the appellants submits that
Rs.25,000/- has been deposited by the appellants as a statutory
liability and the said amount may be adjusted towards
compensation.
8. Considering the above submission, the said amount to be
adjusted towards the amount of compensation.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
RINKU MALI
