IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1132 of 2013 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

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

MUKESHBHAI DASHRATHLAL Versus JAYANTILAL MAGANLAL BAROT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR R.K.MANSURI(3205) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 ARUNKUMAR R DAVE(8949) for the Defendant(s) No. 5 MS HINA DESAI(1023) for the Defendant(s) No. 2 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,4 SHARMISHTA A DAVE(8735) for the Defendant(s) No. 5 UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Defendant(s) No. 3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI Date : 16/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 12.08.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Sabarkanta, Camp at Modasa in MACP No.472/1998, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.35,395/- as a compensation along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal are that on 01.08.1997, the claimant and his friends were going to Ambaji in a jeep bearing registration no.GJ-9-B-1651. The said jeep was being driven by respondent no.3 herein in a very moderate speed by observing traffic rules. When they reached near the place of accident, the respondent no.1/driver of the ST bus bearing registration no.GJ-1-Z-2598 came by driving his bus in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the said jeep, in which the claimant was travelling. Due to the impact of the said accident, the claimant sustained fracture injuries on head, nose and forehead and also sustained other bodily injuries. After the accident, the claimant was immediately taken to Jivan Jyot Hospital, where he was admitted and treated as an indoor patient. The FIR being I. C.R. No.66/1997 also came to be lodged for causing the accident at Modasa Rural Police Station. It is also the case of the original claimant that at the time of accident, he was gainfully engaged in selling of video cassette and electric fittings work and thereby earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month. Therefore, the claim petition for seeking the compensation of Rs.50,000/- came to be filed.

3. On being served, the respondent no.2/ST Corporation filed its affidavit at Exh.17, thereby denying all the averments made in the claim petition and prayed for rejection of the claim petition.

4. Having considered the pleadings, evidence led by the respective parties and the submissions canvassed by the respective parties, the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.35,395/- as a compensation along with interest at the rate of

7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the original claimant/appellant challenged the impugned judgment and award on the ground of negligence as well as exoneration of the insurance company of the jeep from satisfying the impugned judgment and award.

6. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

7. Mr. R. K. Mansuri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the original claimant/appellant herein vehemently submitted that the accident has occurred owing to the composite negligence of the driver of the ST bus bearing registration no.GJ-1-Z-2598 and the driver of the jeep bearing registration no.GJ-9-B-1651; however, the learned Tribunal has held the driver of the Jeep 100% negligent for causing the accident. He further submitted that the accident in question is the head on collision, therefore, the learned Tribunal could have held that the drivers of the both vehicles were negligent for causing the accident. He further subm