Gujarat High Court
Bashirbhai Jusabbhai Piparwadiya vs New India Assurance Company Limited on 20 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2929/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2929 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
BASHIRBHAI JUSABBHAI PIPARWADIYA & ANR.
Versus
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR C P CHANIYARA(6836) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR RATILAL V SAKARIA(6613) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 6
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MS MAMTA R VYAS(994) for the Defendant(s) No. 2,3,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 20/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appellants herein are the owner and driver of the
offending truck bearing registration No.GJ-3V-7864, challenged
the impugned judgment and award dated 28.03.2012 passed by
the learned Tribinal (Main), Rajkot in Motor Accident Claim
Petition No.2454/2000. The short issue raised by the appellants
herein regarding their liability to satisfy the award on the ground
that at the time of accident, the deceased Valjibhai Karshanbhai
Fangalia was travelling with his goods, therefore, the risk of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2929/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
deceased was covered under the policy, however, the learned
Tribunal had exonerated the Insurance Company from satisfying
the impugned judgment and award.
2. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
3. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the
learned Tribunal has committed error in holding that at the time
of accident, the deceased was not travelling with his drilling
machine, therefore, the deceased cannot be held as a gratuitous
passenger. Hence, the risk of the deceased was covered under
the policy. He further submitted that the vehicle in question
were duly insured with the Insurance Company. He further
submitted that the policy in question was proved at Exh-29. He
further submitted that the Insurance Company cannot be
exonerated to satisfy the impugned judgment and award,
therefore, the impugned judgment and award is to be modified to
that extent.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Palak H. Thakkar, learned advocate
appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1- Insurance Company
herein vehemently submitted that it was not proved on record
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2929/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
that at the time of accident the deceased was travelling with his
goods. He also drawn the attention of the Court to the
panchnama of the place of accident. He further submitted that
the panchnama does not reflect that at the time of accident the
deceased was travelling with his goods. He further submitted
that the original claimant/ widow of the deceased in her cross-
examination clearly admitted that the deceased was not
travellling with the goods. He further submitted that the
appellants have not stepped into witness box to prove their
version before the learned Tribunal, therefore, there is no
substance in the present appeal and the same is liable to be
dismissed.
5. Having considered submissions of the learned advocates
for the parties and having perused the record, it is on record that
the panchnama of place of accident at Exh-19 is in Marathi
language and the translated copy of the same in Gujarati
language has been placed on Exh-47. On perusal of the
panchnama, on the place of accident the bags of cattle foods
were found and no drilling machine was found at the place of
accident. Further, the widow of the deceased stepped into
witness box and in her cross-examination, she admitted that she
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2929/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
has no evidence that her husband was travelling in the truck
along with the goods. The appellants who were the driver and the
owner of the truck, though filed the written statement before the
learned Tribunal but they have not stepped into the witness box
to prove that at the time of accident, the deceased was travelling
with his goods. Not only this, the perusal of policy at Exh-29
clearly reveals that no premium was paid for the passengers or
non-fare passengers to cover the risk of the deceased. Therefore,
the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in holding that
the Insurance Company was not liable to satisfy the award.
Therefore, I am of the considered view that there is no infirmity
in the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned
Tribunal. Therefore, the same is required to be upheld and
accordingly the impugned judgment and award dated
28.03.2012 is upheld and the present appeal stands dismissed.
6. Statutory amount, if any, lying deposited with the Registry
of this Court, the same shall be transmitted to the concerned
learned Tribunal forthwith.
7. The appellants are directed to deposit the entire awarded
amount, if not deposited, within a period of 4 weeks from today.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2929/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
8. Upon depositing of the said amount, the learned Tribunal
shall disburse the amount to the original claimants after due
verification.
9. R & P, if any, be sent back to the concerned learned
Tribunal forthwith. No order as to costs.
10. Stay, if any, granted by this Court, stands vacated.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
CDP
