Gujarat High Court High Court

Dhavliben vs Sanjay on 14 August, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Dhavliben vs Sanjay on 14 August, 2008
Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

FA/321/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 321 of 2008
 

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

 

DHAVLIBEN
SITARAMBHAI MOVLE (KUNKANA) & 2 - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

SANJAY
KALIA (DELETED) & 2 - Defendant(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
AMIT N PATEL for
Appellant(s) : 1
- 3. 
None
for Defendant(s) : 1 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 14/08/2008 

 

ORAL
ORDER

Heard
learned advocate Mr. Amit N. Patel appearing on behalf of appellant.

Learned
advocate Mr. Patel submitted that claimant as well as an employer has
filed an affidavit, but, they were not remained present for
cross-examination when it was demanded by respondents. He also
submitted that view taken by Division Bench of this Court in case of
Oriental Insurance Company
Limited v. Chintharbhai Shibabhai and Another

reported in 2004(3) GLR 2018,
where, it has been held that Insurance Company is not entitled to
have any opportunity to lead evidence or to have right for
cross-examination under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Recently,
this Court by learned Sinle Judge has examined the question in case
of Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Jeevabhai Govindbhai
Patel and Others
reported in 2008 ACJ 955,
where, the view taken by this Court that affidavit filed whereby the
age and income of the deceased has been given in calculation of
compensation whether opposite party has to be given right to
cross-examine the person who has filed affidavit in order to verify
the age and income of the deceased, the answer is given ‘yes’.

Therefore,
considering the aforesaid submissions, appeal is ADMITTED.

[H.K.

RATHOD, J.]

#Dave

   

Top