Gujarat High Court
Gujarat State Road Transport ... vs Sulochanaben Takathsinh Rana on 5 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2535/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2535 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2535 of 2025
==========================================================
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
SULOCHANABEN TAKATHSINH RANA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA(436) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 05/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
[1] The present appeal is filed at the instance of the Gujarat State
Road Transport Corporation - (for short 'ST Corporation') original
respondent No.2 -under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
(for short 'the Act'), being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
impugned judgment and award dated 22.04.2025 passed by the 06 th
Additional District Judge & M.A.C. Tribunal (Aux.) at Vadodara in
M.A.C.P. No.24 of 2023.
[2] By the said impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has
partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the present respondents
- original claimants under Section 166 of 'the Act', thereby, holding
them entitled to recover an amount of Rs.19,88,500/- by way of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2535/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2025
undefined
compensation from the original opponents jointly and severally
together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the claim
petition till its realization.
[3] Ms. Sejal K. Mandavia, learned advocate has appeared on behalf
of the appellant - ST Corporation and has vehemently submitted that
the Tribunal has committed grave error in deciding the issue of
negligency against the appellant - ST Corporation. The attention of
this Court was invited to the findings and reasons assigned by the
Tribunal while considering the issue of negligency. Learned advocate
had mainly relied upon the evidence of the driver of the appellant - ST
Corporation to contend that the deceased had in fact tried to board
the bus while the ST Bus was in process of being parked at the bus
stand.
[3.1] According to her, the written statement was also filed before the
Tribunal. The driver, who was examined, had deposed before the
Court that on the date of accident many passengers were waiting for
the bus at the Dabhoi stand and when bus had entered the campus,
the passengers had started to run to board the bus. Before the bus
was parked at the bus stand, the deceased who was in process of
boarding the bus along with other passengers fell down. She had
further pointed out that deceased came under the backside of the
wheel of the conductor side. She has therefore submitted that there
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2535/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2025
undefined
was no negligency on the part of the driver of the ST bus, in fact, the
accident was resulted because of the deceased's own negligency. She
has, therefore, urged this Court to exonerate the ST Corporation from
the liability to pay the amount of compensation by allowing the
present appeal.
[4] Noticing the aforesaid arguments of the learned advocate for
the appellant - ST Corporation, this Court vide order dated
22.07.2025 had called upon the learned advocate to place on record
the copy of the FIR, panchnama and the deposition of the driver of the
appellant- ST Corporation, which according to her, was examined
before the Tribunal. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing,
learned advocate on record for the appellant has placed on record the
relevant documents by way of paper-book. At the outset, she has fairly
conceded that though the affidavit of examination-in-chief of the
driver has been placed on record, however, the driver had not been
cross examined. She was, therefore, unable to produce on record the
cross examination of the driver of the vehicle involved.
[5] Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned advocate
for the appellant - ST Corporation, this Court had reverified the
aforesaid aspect, to which learned advocate has submitted that the
driver had not entered the witness box for cross examination. Noticing
the aforesaid submission of learned advocate for the appellant - ST
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2535/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2025
undefined
Corporation, in absence of the driver having entered the witness box,
though the examination-in-chief affidavit has been placed on record,
no evidentiary value can be attached to such deposition. In such
circumstances, the adverse inference is in fact required to be drawn
against the driver of the ST bus. Having noted so, this Court has re-
appreciated the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal in light
of the copy of the FIR produced on record at Exhibit-17 and
panchnama of the place of accident. As against the deposition of the
claimant being brought on record at Exhibit-15, the Tribunal upon
appreciation of the aforesaid documents, has noticed that the
deceased was waiting for ST bus near Dabhoi bus stand and at that
time, the driver of the bus had arrived while the deceased was trying
to board the ST bus, the driver had started the ST bus and the
deceased therefore fell down on the road. In the process, the rear
wheel of the ST bus had ran over the deceased, resulting into the
death of the deceased. Noticing the aforesaid circumstances being
emerged from the FIR produced on record, in light of the evidence of
the claimant, the Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that the driver
of the ST bus was negligent towards the occurrence of the accident. It
was the duty of the driver of the ST bus to take care and caution to
avoid such mishaps. Upon appreciation of the aforesaid findings and
reasons assigned in light of the evidence produced on record, in
absence of any contradictions being pointed out by the learned
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2535/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2025
undefined
advocate for the appellant, this Court is of the view that no error can
be found with the conclusion drawn by the Tribunal holding the driver
of the ST bus solely negligent towards the occurrence of the accident.
[6] For the foregoing reasons, the appeal being devoid of any merits,
is hereby dismissed. Since the appeal is dismissed summarily, the
appellant - ST Corporation is directed to deposit the entire awarded
amount with proportionate costs and interest with the concerned
Tribunal within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this
order. On deposit of the aforesaid entire award amount, the Tribunal
shall at liberty to pass appropriate order/s of release disbursement in
the accordance with law and the facts and circumstances of the case.
[7] With these observations, the First Appeal stands dismissed.
Connected Civil Application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
Lalji Desai
