Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CRA/227/2009 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 227 of 2009
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
VALLABHBHAI
KADVABHAI MAKWANA - Applicant(s)
Versus
MANSUKHBHAI
KARAMSHIBHAI ZALA MAKWANA & 1 - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MEHUL S SHAH for
Applicant
NOTICE SERVED for Opponent(s) : 1
MR SHASHIKANT S
GADE for Opponent:
2
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 26/08/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
This
Civil Revision Application preferred under Section 115 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 is directed against the judgment and order
passed by the M.A.C. Tribunal[Main], Bhavnagar below application
Exh.5 in M.A.C.Petition No. 800 of 2007 by which the learned Tribunal
allowed the application preferred under Section 140 of the Motor
Vehicles Act against the opponent no.1 and dismissed the application
against the opponent no.2-New India Assurance Company. It is observed
by the Tribunal that the applicant do recover Rs. 25,000/- from
opponent no.1 together with running interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a.
from the date of main claim petition as per the judgment of the
Hon’ble Gujarat High Court reported in 1995 A.C.J. 831 in the case of
Anitaben and others vs. Abdulkarim Allarakhan Shaikh and others,
till realization. Opponent no.1 is directed by the Tribunal to
deposit the amount of award in the office of the Tribunal within one
month from the date of the order. Thereafter, order of disbursement
came to be passed by the Tribunal. Aforesaid order is challenged by
the opponent no.1 before this Court.
I have
heard Mr. Mehul S Shah, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr
Shashikant Gade, learned advocate for opponent no.2 at length and in
great detail. Though served, none is present for opponent no.1.
Considering the rival submissions, impugned judgment and order as
well as the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court
in the case of United
India Insurance Co.Ltd v. Lilaben Wd/o. Ganpatbhai Vasava and 3 Ors,
reported in 2007 [O] GLHEL-HC 220949
and the ratio laid down therein, the applicant shall deposit the
amount awarded by the learned Tribunal under Section 140 of the Motor
Vehicles Act within one month from the date of this order. On the
aforesaid amount being deposited by the applicant, claimant will be
entitled to withdraw the same on furnishing security/surety of the
like amount in question awarded by the Tribunal and shall also file
an undertaking before the Tribunal that he will not withdraw the
application filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
With
this observation, the Civil Revision Application is allowed. The
impugned order dated 22nd
April, 2009 passed by the M.A.C.Tribunal [Main], Bhavnagar below
exh.5 in M.A.C. Petition No. 800 of 2007 is modified to the extent
indicated herein above. Rule is made absolute to the extent indicated
herein above.
[H.B.
ANTANI, J.]
pirzada/-
Top