Gujarat High Court
Bharatbhai Kalubhai Koli Through Heirs vs Kantibhai Valabhai Bharvad on 23 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4657/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4657 of 2009
==========================================================
BHARATBHAI KALUBHAI KOLI THROUGH HEIRS & ORS.
Versus
KANTIBHAI VALABHAI BHARVAD & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MRS NISHA M PARIKH(2397) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 23/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal arises from the judgment and award
dated 31.07.2007 passed in MACP No. 1238 of 1999 by the
learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Fast
Track Court No.1, Ahmedabad (Rural), Viramgam.
2. On perusal of the said judgment and award, it appears that
vide the said judgment and award, the claim petition was
rejected.
3. The accident in question took place on 22.06.1999 at 4'o
clock in the evening. It appears that on the fateful day,
allegedly, using the said Matador-407, bearing registration
no. GJ-1-TT-7159, a marriage party was traveling.
Unfortunately, the said Matador slided down the road and
turned turtle. One of the deaths, which has occurred in the
resultant accident was that of Mr. Bharatbhai Kalubhai. It
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4657/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
is the parents of the said deceased Bharatbhai Kalubhai
who had preferred the MACP No. 1238 of 1999.
4. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
5. Learned advocates for the parties have brought to the
notice of this Court that initially, the said claim petition
was filed before the Tribunal at Ahmedabad (Rural).
However, subsequently, as is apparent from the Rojkam,
that from the year of 2004, the matter was transferred to
the Tribunal at Viramgam. Naturally, on account of such
transfer, fresh notices should have been issued to the
respective parties. However, it appears from the record that
such notices could not be served on the opponents. It was
just the learned advocate for the claimant, who had
participated in the proceedings before the Tribunal at
Viramgam.
6. As it is incumbent that such notices should have been
served upon the parties / their advocates at Ahmedabad
(Rural) Court and that such notices, though issued, had
either remained unserved or were not issued at all, it is
only fair that the proceedings are remanded back to the
concerned Tribunal for proceedings afresh from the stage
at which the proceedings were transferred to the Tribunal
at Viramgam.
7. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and award dated
31.07.2007 is liable to be quashed and set-aside and is
hereby quashed and set-aside.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4657/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
8. The present appeal stands disposed of, in terms of the
aforesaid observations of this Court.
9. R&P, if any, shall forthwith be remitted back to the
concerned Tribunal, for the Tribunal to conduct
proceedings, from the stage at which the matter was
pending when it first came to be transferred to such
Tribunal at Viramgam.
(J. L. ODEDRA, J)
JIGAR J RABARI
