GULABBHAI POPATBHAI PATEL Vs. LAXMANBHAI VALJIBHAI GAROD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition under Article 226 /227 of the Constitution of India is to the order dtd. 3/1/2018 passed in M.A.C.P. No. 1246 of 2013 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Panchmahals @ Godhra (the Tribunal), whereby, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition for default.

(2.) Heard, learned advocate Mr. Nishit Bhalodi for the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioners - claimants had preferred the claim petition before the learned Tribunal and taking into consideration the failure of the petitioner to enter into the witness box for oral evidence and by observing that the affidavit under O.18 R. 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) has not been produced, the learned Tribunal dismissed the matter where in fact, the learned advocate for the petitioner, referring to decision in Bharatbhai Narsinghbhai Chaudhary and Others v. Malek Rafik Malek Himmatbhai, 2011 (2) GLR 1324 stated that, no matter under the Motor Vehicles Act , 1988 (MV Act ) can be dismissed without deciding the same on merits. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal should have appreciated the fact that along with the claim petition, all necessary supported documents viz. FIR and others were produced on record and the learned Tribunal could have further called for details, had there been any doubt, by following the decision in Jai Prakash v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others , rendered by the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 11801-11804 of 2005 on 17/12/2009 and could have received the documents under Form 54 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 from the Police and on that basis, relying on the Minimum Wage Schedule, could have decided the matter on merits, where the claimant is from Dahod area and unorganized labourer and hence, would be living a nomadic life and would be moving out of the district for labour work. Accordingly, it is urged that the petition may be allowed and the impugned order may be quashed and set aside and the claim petition be ordered to be decided on merits.

(3.) In case of the Bharatbhai Narsinghbhai Chaudhary and Others (supra), it has been held that the learned Tribunal has no power to dismiss the Claim Petition for default taking into consideration the object behind the Motor Vehicles Act , 1988 i.e. to provide adequate compensation to the claimants. The relevant part of the above decision is reproduced herein below: