Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad was hearing a first appeal filed by New India Insurance Company Ltd. against an award dated 26.02.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad (Rural) in MACP No.107/2005. The Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded Rs.8,38,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum to the claimants, who were the legal representatives of the deceased Gautambhai Muljibhai Solanki. The accident occurred on 25.12.2004 involving a container/trailer bearing registration no.GJ-12-U-8798. The insurance company appealed seeking relief against respondent no.8, the owner of the offending vehicle. However, despite the appeal being filed in 2014, the insurance company could not serve the owner. Learned counsel for the appellant sought adjournment to find the new address of respondent no.8. Learned counsel for the original claimants submitted that the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution as the insurance company had failed to serve the owner against whom relief was sought. The court considered that due to the pendency of the appeal since 2014, the original claimants were unable to get the fruits of the award. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution with liberty to the insurance company to file a proper application for revival if it comes up with the correct address of respondent no.8 in the future. The court further directed the learned Tribunal to disburse the entire compensation amount to the original claimants after deducting deficit court fee, if any, and after due verification. Any amount lying deposited with the registry was to be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. Record and proceedings were to be sent back to the Tribunal. No order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Dismissal for Non-Prosecution - Appeal by Insurance Company - The insurance company filed an appeal against the award of compensation to claimants but failed to serve the owner of the offending vehicle despite the appeal being pending since 2014. The court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, observing that the claimants were deprived of the fruits of the award due to the pendency. Liberty was granted to the insurance company to file an application for revival upon furnishing the correct address of the respondent owner. (Paras 4-5) B) Motor Accident Claims - Disbursement of Compensation - The court directed the learned Tribunal to disburse the entire amount of compensation to the original claimants after deducting deficit court fee, if any, and after due verification. Any amount lying deposited with the registry was to be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. (Para 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appeal filed by the insurance company should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to failure to serve the respondent owner.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution with liberty to the insurance company to file a proper application for revival upon furnishing the correct address of respondent no.8. The learned Tribunal is directed to disburse the entire compensation to the original claimants after deducting deficit court fee, if any, and after due verification. Any amount lying deposited with the registry shall be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. Record and proceedings to be sent back. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Dismissal for non-prosecution
- Liberty to revive upon furnishing correct address
- Direction to disburse compensation to claimants
