Gujarat High Court
National Insurance Co.Ltd vs Naranbhai Samjibhai Bhandari on 30 January, 2025
Author: Biren Vaishnav
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2675 of 2010
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2676 of 2010
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2677 of 2010
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2678 of 2010
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2679 of 2010
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
================================================================
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
Versus
NARANBHAI SAMJIBHAI BHANDARI & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SUNIL B PARIKH(582) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR VC VAGHELA(1720) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 6,7
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 30/01/2025
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI)
1. All the captioned appeals are preferred by the appellant-
National Insurance Company (Original opponent No.3) against
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
the impugned common judgment and award dated 30.03.2009
passed by the learned Presiding officer, Fast Track Court No.2,
Ahmedabad (Rural), at Mirzapur in Motor Accident Claim
Petition Nos.1907, 1908, 1909, 1910 and 1911 of 2000, whereby
the learned Court has partly allowed the claim petitions.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Sunil B. Parikh for the
appellants, learned advocate Mr. V.C. Vaghela for respondent
Nos.1 to 5 and learned advocate Mr. H. G. Mazmudar for
respondent/s-New India Insurance Company Limited.
3. Since all captioned appeals are arising out of same facts
and issues, upon the request of learned advocates for the parties,
the captioned First Appeals are taken up together and decided
together by this common judgment.
4. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
4.1. On 02.10.2000, (i) Rameshbhai Naranbhai Bhanderi along
with (ii) his wife Bhartiben Rameshbhai Bhanderi, (iii) his son
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
Shani Rameshbhai Bhanderi (iv) his daughter Denisha
Rameshbhai Bhanderi, and (v) his sister-in-law Naynaben
Parshottambhai Sangani were travelling in Maruti Car bearing
registration No.GJ-01-BP-994 and going towards their
hometown at Tarwala, Dist-Amreli. The said car was driven by
Rameshbhai Naranbhai Bhanderi and when they were passing
from the sim of village Vyamsara, located in the middle of
Bavla-Bagodra road, on National Highway No.8, a truck bearing
registration No.GRN-5884 was parked in the middle of the road
without giving any side indicator or light in reflector and was
loaded with fire crackers. Due to the reflection of headlight from
the opposite side, the driver of Maruti car could not see the truck
from remote, but as car came close to the truck, driver of the car
saw a stationary truck parked on the middle of the road. The
driver applied brakes at a distance of about 15 feet, even then
the car dashed with the rear portion of truck. Resultantly, all the
passengers including driver namely Rameshbhai Naranbhai
Bhanderi sustained serious injuries and succumbed to injuries on
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
the spot. Separate five claim petitions were filed by the
passengers of the car as well as heirs of the driver of the car for
compensation as under:-
Sr.No. MACP Nos. Claimants Claimed
Amounts
in Rs.
1. 1907 of 2000 I. Naranbhai S.Bhanderi 40,00,000
II. Maniben N. Bhanderi
III. Manubhai N.Bhanderi
IV. Vinubhai N.Bhanderi
V. Jagdishbhai N.Bhanderi
(For deceased Rameshbhai
N. Bhanderi)
2. 1908 of 2000 I. Parshottam M. Sangani 3,00,000
II. Lilaben P. Sangani
III. Hiteshbhai P. Sangani
(For deceased Naynaben P.
Sangani)
3. 1909 of 2000 I. Naranbhai S.Bhanderi 3,00,000
II. Maniben N. Bhanderi
III. Manubhai N.Bhanderi
IV. Vinubhai N.Bhanderi
V. Jagdishbhai N.Bhanderi
(For deceased Bhartiben
R.Bhanderi)
4. 1910 of 2000 I. Naranbhai S.Bhanderi 2,00,000
II. Maniben N. Bhanderi
III.Manubhai N.Bhanderi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
IV. Vinubhai N.Bhanderi
V. Jagdishbhai N.Bhanderi
(For Minor deceased
Denisha R. Bhanderi)
5. 1911 of 2000 I. Naranbhai S.Bhanderi 2,00,000
II. Maniben N. Bhanderi
III. Manubhai N.Bhanderi
IV.Vinubhai N.Bhanderi
V. Jagdishbhai N.Bhanderi
(For Minor deceased Shani
R.Bhanderi)
4.2. In the all the above claim petitions, Notices were served to
opponents. Driver and truck owner i.e. Opponent Nos.1 and 2
appeared and filed their joint Written Statement at Exh-11 in
MACP No.1907 of 2000, at Exh-13 in MACP No.1908 of
2000, at Exh-13 in MACP No.1909 of 2000, Exh-13 in MACP
No.1910 of 2000, Exh-13 in MACP No.1911 of 2000 and
prayed to dismiss the claim petitions.
4.3. Opponent No.3-National Insurance Company appeared
and filed Written Statement at Exh-15 in MACP No.1907 of
2000, at Exh-20 in MACP No.1908 of 2000, at Exh-21 in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
MACP No.1909 of 2000, at Exh-22 in MACP No.1910 of 2000,
at Exh-22 in MACP No.1911 of 2000 and prayed to dismiss the
claim petitions.
4.4. Opponent No.4-Naranbhai Bhanderi (father of deceased
Rameshbhai Bhanderi) appeared and filed Written Statement at
Exh-24 in MACP No.1908 of 2000 and chose not to defend
himself in other claim petitions.
4.5. Opponent No.5-New India Insurance Company appeared
and filed Written Statement at Exh-23 in MACP No.1908 of
2000, at Exh-24 in MACP No.1909 of 2000, at Exh-25 in
MACP No.1910 of 2000, at Exh-25 in MACP No.1911 of 2000
and prayed to dismiss the claim petitions.
4.6. Thereafter, claimant No.1 - Naranbhai Samjibhai Bhanderi
(father of deceased) deposed at Exh-28 in MACP No. 1907 of
2000, the claimant No.1 - Parshottambhai Mohanbhai Sangani
(father of deceased) deposed at Exh-27 in MACP No. 1908 of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
2000, the claimant No.1 - Naranbhai Samjibhai Bhanderi (father
in law of deceased) deposed at Exh-28 in MACP No. 1909 of
2000, the claimant No.1 - Naranbhai Samjibhai Bhanderi
(grandfather of deceased) deposed at Exh-28 in MACP No.
1910 of 2000, the claimant No.1 - Naranbhai Samjibhai
Bhanderi (grandfather of deceased) deposed at Exh-28 in MACP
No. 1911 of 2000.
4.7. After considering the evidence on record, learned Court
has found the driver of truck sole negligent in all claim petitions
and awarded following amount of compensation in favour of
respective claimants and held opponents Nos.1 to 3 jointly and
severally liable to pay the awarded compensation with 9%
interest and proportionate costs from date of claim petitions till
realization as under:-
MACP Nos. Compensation Awarded compensation in
claimed in Rs. Rs.
1907 of 2000 40,00,000 5,03,000
1908 of 2000 3,00,000 3,85,000
1909 of 2000 3,00,000 3,61,000
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
1910 of 2000 2,00,000 1,50,000
1911 of 2000 2,00,000 1,50,000
4.8. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and award, the appellant-National Insurance Company
Limited has filed all First Appeals on the ground of negligence
and quantum.
5. Learned advocate for the appellant/s-Insurance Company
submitted that the challenge under the First Appeals are on the
ground of negligence and quantum. Learned advocate for the
appellants submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in
holding the driver of the truck bearing No.GRN-5884 negligent
in causing the accident. It is further submitted that from the
panchnama, it transpires that the car was in excessive speed and
the brakemarks on the road indicate that the speed of the car was
excessive. The car dashed from behind and therefore, not only
the driver of the truck was negligent but the driver of the car
was equally negligent in the occurrence of the accident. So far
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
as the quantum is concerned, the learned Tribunal has not
appreciated the evidence on record and has awarded excessive
amount of compensation to the claimants. The multiplier which
has been applied by the learned Tribunal is excessive and not in
consonance with the settled law. Challenge is also raised with
regard to the rate of interest awarded by the learned Tribunal.
Except this, there are no other submissions canvassed by the
learned advocate for the appellants.
6. As against this, learned advocate Mr. V.C. Vaghela for the
respondent/s-claimant/s supported the judgment and award and
submitted that the truck driver was solely negligent as the truck
was parked on the middle of the road without any indicator or
reflector. The time of the accident was early morning. The
driver of the Maruti Car had also made an attempt to avoid the
accident which can be seen from the panchnama. The
panchnama clearly indicates the brakemarks of the car at the
spot of accident. When the driver of the truck has not been
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
examined to dislodge the claim of negligence, relying upon the
best available evidence, learned Tribunal has arrived at the
conclusion that the driver of the truck was solely negligent in
the occurrence of accident and this finding may not be disturbed
by this Court in absence of any contrary evidence.
7. Learned advocate Mr. H.G. Mazmudar for New India
Insurance Company Limited submitted that the truck driver was
sole negligent in happening of the accident and there are no
justifiable reasons for disturbing the findings on negligence
which have been arrived at by the learned Tribunal after
assessing the facts.
8. Having considered the submissions of the learned
advocates for the respective parties and considering the evidence
which can be seen from the record and proceedings, learned
Tribunal has found that the offending truck was parked on the
middle of the road without any side light or indicator for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
vehicles who were coming from behind. In deciding the issue of
negligence, the definition of negligence is to be considered first.
Negligence consists of committing something which ought to
have been done either in different manner or not done at all.
When there is a duty to execute care, reasonable care must be
taken to avoid acts or omissions which could be reasonably
foreseen to be likely to cause physical injury to persons. In the
present case, the driver of the truck has not come forward to
substantiate the omission to take care in avoiding the accident.
Relying upon the panchnama, learned Tribunal has found that
the driver of the car had applied brakes and the brakemarks are
found on the road. We also concur with the finding which has
been arrived at by the learned Tribunal that the driver of the
truck was solely negligent. On the quantum aspect, we do not
find any substance in the submission of the learned advocate for
the appellants in disturbing the finding on the amount of
compensation.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2675/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/01/2025
undefined
9. In totality of the facts, we are of the opinion that no case is
made out by the Insurance Company in taking a different view
than the view taken by the learned Tribunal in partly allowing
the claim petitions. We are informed that the claimants have not
preferred any appeals for enhancement of compensation.
10. Resultantly, captioned First Appeals are dismissed. Record
and proceedings to be sent back to the concerned Court /
Tribunal.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
(D. M. DESAI,J)
RINKU MALI
