Modification of Order dtd.

undefined IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3050 of 2025 [On note for speaking to minutes of order dated 27/11/2025 in R/SCA/3050/2025 ]

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

PRATAPSINH GANPATBHAI BAMAN (LABANA)

Versus PRAKASH GIRVARSINH NAYAK & ORS.

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

Appearance:

NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Respondent(s) No. 3 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 18/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

Perused the note for speaking to minutes.

It appears that, due to inadvertence, the concluding date was omitted at the end of paragraph No. [8.0] of the order dated

27.11.2025. The corrected portion shall read as under:

“aforesaid period i.e. from 21 ^st march, 2012 till passing of the order i.e. 27 ^th November, 2025 .”

Rest of the order shall remain as it is. Present note for speaking to minutes is disposed of in aforesaid terms.

Registry is directed to issue fresh writ accordingly.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)

GARVITA undefined IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3050 of 2025 ==========================================================

PRATAPSINH GANPATBHAI BAMAN (LABANA)

Versus PRAKASH GIRVARSINH NAYAK & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Respondent(s) No. 3 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 27/11/2025

ORAL ORDER

[1.0] By way of present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for an appropriate writ/ direction / order to quash and set aside the order passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lunawada, Dahod in Misc. Application No.133/2021 dated 05.07.2023 and restore the original MACP No.74/2012 with appropriate directions.

[2.0] Learned advocate for the insurance company has opposed the petition on the ground that the insurance company is not at fault and insurance company should not be fastened with or saddled with the liability of interest for the aforesaid period as due to negligence on the part of the claimant, claim petition was dismissed. Even, the claimant has filed an undertaking that he will not claim the interest for the period from the date of dismissal of claim petition till the claim petition gets restored.

[3.0] Having heard the learned advocate appearing for the respective parties, it appears that the petitioner herein – original claimant had preferred MACP No.74 of 2012 before the learned MAC Tribunal (Auxi.), at Lunawada which came to be dismissed on 29.07.2021 pursuant to which the original claimant preferred application being Misc. Application No.133/2021 seeking restoration of MACP No.74/2012 which also came to be dismissed.

[4.0] Perusing the record, it appears that the claim petition being MACP No.74/2012 was filed in the year 2012 and thereafter the matter remained sine die for a long time and issues were framed only in the year 2021 and due to COVID-19 pandemic, the claimant was not in contact of his advocate and/or the learned advocate appearing before the Tribunal on behalf of claimant also remained absent and hence, the claim petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 26.07.2021. If we peruse the order dated 26.07.2021, which is produced at Annexure-B to the present petition, it appears that the learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition on the ground that time and again the claim petition being adjourned on the ground of absence of either the claimant or his advocate and the claimant has not come forward to prove his case and therefore, the learned Tribunal was pleased to close the right of