Gujarat High Court Dismisses GSRTC Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Negligence of ST Bus Driver Upheld. Tribunal's finding of bus driver's negligence based on evidence and charge-sheet not perverse; no interference warranted under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Prosecution

Admin

2026-05-19 17:40:23

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (GSRTC) appealed against the judgment and award dated 30.11.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Mahesana at Visnagar in MAC Petition No.62 of 2015. The claim petition was filed by the legal heirs of the deceased, Mahammadkhan Umarkhan Baloch, who died in a motor accident on 30.08.2015. The accident occurred when the deceased was riding his motorcycle and a ST bus bearing registration No. GJ-18-Y-7509, driven negligently, dashed against him, causing fatal injuries. The Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition, awarding compensation. The appellant GSRTC, being the owner of the bus, challenged the award primarily on the ground of negligence, arguing that the deceased himself was negligent. The High Court heard the appellant's counsel, Mr. H.S. Munshaw, while the respondents remained absent despite service. The court examined the Tribunal's findings and noted that the Tribunal had considered the evidence, including the charge-sheet filed against the bus driver, and concluded that the bus driver was negligent. The High Court held that the finding of negligence was based on evidence and was not perverse. It reiterated that in an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the court would not interfere with findings of fact unless they are perverse or based on no evidence. Since the Tribunal's conclusion was plausible and supported by material, the appeal was dismissed. The court also noted that no other grounds were raised regarding the quantum of compensation. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Motor Vehicles Act - Negligence - Appreciation of Evidence - Section 173 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The appellant GSRTC challenged the Tribunal's award on negligence, contending that the deceased was negligent. The High Court held that the Tribunal's finding of negligence against the ST bus driver was based on evidence, including the charge-sheet filed against the bus driver, and was not perverse. The court declined to interfere, as the finding was plausible and supported by material on record. (Paras 1-4)

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Tribunal's finding of negligence against the ST bus driver was perverse or based on no evidence, warranting interference in appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

Negligence
Motor accident claim
Appreciation of evidence
Interference in appeal
Section 173 Motor Vehicles Act
1988

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (01) 387

R/First Appeal No. 1030 of 2025

2026-01-23

Hasmukh D. Suthar

Mr. H.S. Munshaw for the Appellant

Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation

Baloch Umarkhan Chanukhan & Ors.

Nature of Litigation

First appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against judgment and award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

Remedy Sought

Appellant GSRTC sought setting aside of the Tribunal's award on the ground that the deceased was negligent.

Filing Reason

Appellant aggrieved by the Tribunal's finding of negligence against the ST bus driver.

Previous Decisions

Tribunal partly allowed MAC Petition No.62 of 2015 on 30.11.2024, awarding compensation.

Issues

Whether the Tribunal's finding of negligence against the ST bus driver is perverse or based on no evidence.

Submissions/Arguments

Learned Advocate Mr. H.S. Munshaw for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal erred in considering negligence as the deceased himself was negligent.

Ratio Decidendi

In an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the High Court will not interfere with findings of fact unless they are perverse or based on no evidence. The Tribunal's finding of negligence against the bus driver, based on evidence including the charge-sheet, was plausible and not perverse.

Judgment Excerpts

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 30.11.2024 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Mahesana at Visnagar in MAC Petition No.62 of 2015, the appellant – original opponent no.2 - Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Procedural History

Original claimants filed MAC Petition No.62 of 2015 before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Mahesana at Visnagar. Tribunal partly allowed the petition on 30.11.2024. Appellant GSRTC filed First Appeal No.1030 of 2025 before the High Court of Gujarat on 23.01.2026.