IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 630 of 2018 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 625 of 2018 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 626 of 2018 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 627 of 2018 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 629 of 2018 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ==========================================================

SHRI KHUSHALDAS GOPALDAS THACKER & ORS.

Versus DRIVER OF TRUCK NO. GQY-4720 & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3 MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Defendant(s) No. 4 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI Date : 15/12/2025

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The captioned appeals have been preferred against the common impugned judgment and award dated 29.09.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi- 10), Bhuj- Kachchh in Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos.505 of 1995, 509 of 1995, 510 of 1995, 503 of 1995 and 504 of 1995, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition except the Motor Accident Claim Petition No.510 of 1995.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeals are that the accident had occurred on 04.02.1995 near a minor bridge, about 12 to 13 km away from Bhachau on the way to Samakhiyali. On the fateful day, the deceased and their family members were proceeding from Adipur to Bhabhar to attend religious ceremony in a car bearing registration No.GJ-8-A-2553, which was being driven by the deceased Girishkumar K. Thacker on the left hand side of the road in a moderate and controllable speed. At about 10:00 am when they reached near the place of accident, in the meantime, a truck bearing registration No.GQY- 4720 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner at excessive speed and the driver of the said truck lost the control over the steering and came on wrong side of the road and dashed with the said car. Due to the impact of the said accident, the occupants of the car sustained multiple injuries. Out of them, three succumbed to the injuries and other sustained grievous injuries. It is also stated in the claim petition that the car was damaged beyond repairs. It is also stated that the accident took place due to the sole negligence of the truck driver.

3. On being served, the Insurance Company of the car filed the written statement in the claim petitions thereby contending that the driver of the offending truck was solely negligent and prayed for exoneration of the Insurance Company.

4. The Insurance Company of the truck also filed the written statement thereby denying the contents of the claim petition and prayed for rejection of the claim petition. It is also stated that the accident took place owing to the sole negligence of the driver of the car, therefore, the Insurance Company of the truck also prayed for exoneration.

[

5. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues for determination:-

“1. Whether the applicants prove that the deceased died and the injured claimants were injured by rash and/or negligent act of the driver of vehicle involved in the incident?

2. Whether applicants are entitled to compensation from the opponents or any of them? If yes, what amount and from whom?

3. What award?”

6. In order to prove their respective claims, the claimants have led the following oral as well as the documentary evidence before the learned Tribunal:-

7. Having considered the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred owing to the sole negligence of the driver of the Fiat car bearing registration No.GJ-8-A-2553. The learned Tribunal had also held that there was no negligence for causin