Gujarat High Court
Punmaji Narsaji Prajapati vs Makwana Ramabhai Talabhai on 24 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2022 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4594 of 2022
==========================================================
PUNMAJI NARSAJI PRAJAPATI
Versus
MAKWANA RAMABHAI TALABHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS KARUNA V RAHEVAR(3818) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 24/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Vishal C. Mehta for the
appellant, Ms. Karuna V. Rahevar learned advocate has
entered her appearance on behalf of respondent no. 3. The
notice issued by this Court upon respondent no. 2, who, is
the owner of the vehicle has been duly served, however,no
appearance has been entered. Noticing the submissions made
by the learned advocate for the applicant, the matter is taken
up for final hering at the admission stage with the consent of
the learned advocates for the respective parties.
2. Learned advocate for the appellant at the outset has
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2022 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2025
undefined
placed on record the judgment and award dated 30.08.2022,
passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Auxiliary) at
Deesa, District-Banaskantha in Motor Accident Claim Petition
No. 4225 of 2009 (old no. 8 of 2009) and has submitted that
in the claim petition preferred by appellant-original claimant
seeking damages towards the loss of the vehicle in the same
accident, the Tribunal has entertained the claim petition by
holding the present respondents-original opponents in the
claim petition, jointly and severely liable to pay the amount
of compensation towards the damages incurred on account of
loss of vehicle. Referring to the aforesaid judgment, learned
advocate has invited my attention to the fact that the copy of
the complaint, copy of the panchnama and the copy of the
charge-sheet has been produced on record in the aforesaid
proceedings which has been admitted as an evidence and has
been marked as Exh- 20, 21 and 22 respectively. By referring
to the aforesaid documents as considered by the Tribunal
while passing the said judgment, learned advocate has further
submitted that even in the present claim proceedings, the said
documents were produced on record for consideration.
However, the same being xerox copy, the Tribunal has
marked it as tentative Exh- 26, 27 and 30, the same has not
been admitted as an evidence. The attention of this Court
was further invited to the findings and reasons assigned by
the Tribunal while concluding on the issue wherein the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2022 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2025
undefined
Tribunal has held that except for the oral evidence brought
on record the claimant has failed to place on record the
documentary proof in absence of any certified copy of the
investigation papers or the charge-sheet being produced on
record.
3. According to learned advocate at one stage the Tribunal
has held both the drivers of the vehicles involved in the
accident 50%- 50% negligent, while answering the issue of
negligency, however while concluding, the Tribunal has
dismiss the claim petition for lack of documentary evidences
in support of their claim petition. He has therefore, urged this
Court to remand the matter back to the concerned Tribunal
for fresh consideration, in light of the aforesaid decision of
the Tribunal passed in MACP No. 4225 of 2009. Learned
advocate had lastly, submitted that an opportunity may be
extended to the claimant to establish his case before the
Tribunal.
4. Ms. Karuna V. Rahevar learned advocate appearing for
the respondent no. 3-Insurance Company has mainly relied
upon the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal and
has submitted that in absence of any documentary proof being
produced on record no error can be found with the aforesaid
conclusion drawn by the Tribunal.
5. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2022 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2025
undefined
advocates appearing for the respective parties and noticing the
fact that arising out of the same accident the Tribunal in case
of the claim petition preferred by the present appellant-
original claimant in respect of the damages towards the
vehicle being entertained, the prayer of the appellant for
remand is justified, more particularly considering the fact that
the copy of the complaint, copy of the place of the
panchnama and copy of the charge-sheet as placed for
consideration before the Tribunal in the aforesaid claim
petition has been entertained and has been admitted as an
evidence at Exh- 20, 21 and 22 respectively. As rightly
pointed out by learned advocate for the appellant, considering
the findings and reasons assigned while deciding the issue of
negligency, the Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion holding
the drivers of both the vehicles involved to be 50% negligent.
Thus, in such circumstances once the negligency issue was
answered in affirmative and the aforesaid documents if place
for consideration the issue of occurrence of the accident and
the involvement of the vehicle is established. As regards, the
issue of quantum of compensation is concerned, the bare
perusal of the list of documentary evidence suggests that the
original disability certificate and the relevant medical case
papers have been placed for consideration despite the
Tribunal has treated it and has marked it as tentative
evidence. In the opinion of this Court, the Tribunal has
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4594/2022 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2025
undefined
committed an error in not considering the aforesaid
documents in its right perspective. Since, this court is inclined
to accept the prayer of the applicant, noticing the fact that
the original complaint, panchnama and the charge-sheet
papers have been admitted as an evidence in the cognate
matter, the matter is required to be remanded back to the
Tribunal. The Tribunal may re-look into the whole set of
evidences to examine the issue of compensation. The
impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is
therefore, quashed and set aside.
6. For the forgoing reasons, the matter is directed to be
remanded back to the Tribunal. The original claim petition is
directed to be restored to its original file. The appellant-
original claimant is at liberty to produce on record the copy
of the complaint, panchnama and the charge-sheet papers for
consideration of the Tribunal. The claimant shall be at liberty
to lead his evidence in this regard. The opportunity may also
be extended to the respondent-Insurance Company.
7. With this observation the First Appeal stands allowed.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
Parul Dutta
