LEELABEN WD/O ANOPBHAI Vs. MAHENDRABHAI SARDARBHAI KANABHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dtd. 4/1/2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Panchmahals at Godhra (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.161 of 2013, the appellants - original claimants have preferred present appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short).

(2.) The brief facts of the case of the claimants in the claim petition are that on 23/4/2012, the deceased Anopbhai @ Kalubhai Dalsukhbhai Pateliya and others were travelling as labourers in Tractor No.GJ-17-D-7173 and Trolley No.GJ-17-Y-2569 to take stones and the said vehicle was being driven by original opponent No.1 in rash and negligent manner and at about 1.30 hours, the driver of the offending vehicle suddenly applied brakes as a result of which, the deceased Anopbhai Pateliya was thrown out on the road from the trolley and sustained and succumbed to fatal injuries and therefore, the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased filed the claim petition being MACP No.161 of 2013.

(3.) Having heard learned advocate appearing for the respective parties and perusing the impugned judgment and award, it appears that the charge-sheet is filed against original opponent No.1 which has culminated into Criminal Case No.577 of 2022. Merely because no sufficient documents are produced and/or no opportunity is given to produce such documents is not a ground to reject the claim petition. Further, involvement of offending vehicle is not believed in absence of any material or documents. Without considering further on merits of the case, as the claimants are having sufficient documents and evidence to prove and show the involvement of the offending vehicle, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jana Bai Wd/o. Dinkarrao Ghorpade and Ors. vs. ICICI Lombard Insurance Company Ltd. reported in (2012)10 SCC 512, this Court is of considered view that to prove the involvement of the offending vehicle, one more opportunity is required to be given to the claimants considering the object of legislature as proceeding under the Motor Vehicles Act is a benevolent legislation and hypertechnical view is required to be avoided. Considering the aforesaid fact, without discussing any further on merits of the case, matter is required to be remitted back to the learned Tribunal.