Gujarat High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Tara Maheshkumar Ailsinghani on 2 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3640 of 2024
==========================================================
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
Versus
TARA MAHESHKUMAR AILSINGHANI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA B GANDHI(13129) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3
MS SHREYA M SONI(10618) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 4,5,6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 02/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal is filed by the
appellant-Insurance Company against the judgment and
award dated 08.07.2024 passed by the learned Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kheda at Nadiad in
MACP No.976 of 2021, wherein the learned Tribunal has
partly allowed the claim petition.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Palak Thakkar for
the appellant, learned advocate Mr.Aditya Gandhi for
respondent Nos.1 to 3. Though served, none appeared for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
respondent Nos.4 to 6.
3. Brief facts of the case are as under:
3.1 On 19.10.2019, at about 7.00 a.m., deceased
was travelling in Maruti Swift Car bearing registration
No.GJ-6HL-1552. When he reached near the place of
accident which is on Mumbai-Ahmedabad Highway in the
vicinity of village Deslepada, in front of Diamond Hotel, a
truck bearing registration No.RJ-14-GJ-7648 being driven
by opponent No.1 came in rash and negligent manner and
dashed with Maruti Swift Car which was going in third
lane of highway. Due to which, deceased sustained severe
injuries and succumbed. FIR was lodged against driver of
truck before Manor Police Station.
3.2 Legal heirs/representatives of deceased filed a
claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act
claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-. Opponents were
served with notices. Opponent Nos.1 and 3 did not contest
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
the claim petition. Opponent No.2 - Tata AIG General
Insurance Company Ltd. insurer of Car appeared and filed
a Written Statement at Ex.32. Opponent No.4 - New India
Assurance Company Ltd. insurer of Truck appeared and
filed Written Statement at Ex.30. Claimant No.1 filed
examination-in-chief at Ex.35 and produced documents
such as complaint, Panchnama, Inquest Panchnama,
Postmortem report, chargesheet and other documentary
evidence in support of claim petition. After considering the
evidence, learned Tribunal held driver of truck negligent to
the extent of 90% and driver of car to the extent of 10%
and partly allowed the claim petition directing claimants
to recover the amount of Rs.30,55,848/- with interest @
7.5% with proportionate costs from opponents jointly and
severally.
3.3 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
impugned judgment and award, opponent No.4 -
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
Insurance Company - appellant filed the present First
Appeal.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted
that the present first appeal has been filed challenging the
attribution of 90% negligence on the part of driver of
truck. It is further submitted that, as per the map attached
to panchnama, Maruti car was being driven in last lane
i.e. third lane and the accident occurred when truck
entered the main highway from a by-lane. It is submitted
that car driver was solely negligent in the occurrence of
accident as the other two lanes were open; however,
driver of car, did not remain careful while driving car.
5. Learned advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 has
supported the judgment and award passed by the learned
Tribunal and submitted that the the compensation awarded
by the learned Tribunal is just and proper.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
6. I have considered submissions and also perused
panchnama, map of the place of accident and FIR. On
perusal of map which is part of panchnama, indicates that
truck entered the main road from a by-lane and dashed
with Maruti Swift Car, which was coming in third lane of
the highway. In the cases of negligence, a driver entering
the main highway from a by-lane is expected to be more
vigilant and carefully. The driver of offending truck failed
to do so and did not step into the witness box to depose
on the aspect of negligence. When a vehicle is approaching
a main road from a by-lane, driver is duty bound to
ensure that no vehicle is approaching, particularly in the
near vicinity.
7. It appears from the record that driver of truck
did not remain vigilant and acted negligently. After
considering the materials placed before learned Tribunal,
driver of truck was held negligent to the extent of 90%
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3640/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
and driver of maruti car was held negligent to the extent
of 10%. This findings is based on the evidence available
before the learned Tribunal. In absence of any contrary
evidence to reduce the percentage of negligence attributed
to the truck driver, I am not inclined to agree with the
submissions canvassed by learned advocate for the
appellant. Hence, I do not find any justifiable reason to
disturb the ratio of negligence attributed to both drivers.
Accordingly, present First Appeal fails and is hereby
dismissed.
8. Record and proceedings, if any, received, be
sent back to the concerned Court/Tribunal
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MANOJ
