FA/2703/2007 1/7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 2703 of 2007 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7575 of 2007 In FIRST APPEAL No. 2703 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.R.VORA HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 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? ========================================================= NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. - Appellant(s) Versus SHARMILABEN HUKMICHAND MEWADA & 2 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR PV NANAVATI for Appellant(s) : 1,MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI for Appellant(s) : 1, MR.HIREN M MODI for Defendant(s) : 1, RULE NOT RECD BACK for Defendant(s) : 2 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.R.VORA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 19/02/2008 FA/2703/2007 2/7 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Section 140, 145(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act is filed by the appellant – original opponent Nos.2 and 4 – The New Indian Assurance Company Limited, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 04.01.2007 passed below Exh.-3 in M.A.C.P.No. 493 of 2004 by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Fast Track Court No.6, Ahmedabad City under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act, 1988'). 2. It is the contention on behalf of the appellant – original Opponent Nos.2 and 4 that the learned Tribunal has materially erred in allowing the application submitted by the original claimant for getting interim compensation under 'No Fault Liability' as the learned Tribunal did not have any jurisdiction to try and decide the claim as per the provisions of Section 166(2) of the Act. It is submitted that alleged accident had occurred near FA/2703/2007 3/7 JUDGMENT Hebatpur Village on Palanpur – Abu Road under the jurisdiction of Palanpur Police Station and therefore, the learned Tribunal, Ahmedabad had no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the application for compensation under Section 166 of the Act. Therefore, when the learned Tribunal had no jurisdiction to decide the claim petition under Section 166 of the Act, the learned Tribunal has materially erred in allowing the application under Section 140 of the Act and, therefore, it is requested to allow the present appeal. 3. Mr.Hiren Modi, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant while supporting the order passed by the learned Tribunal has submitted that as rightly held by the learned Tribunal at the time of deciding the application under Section 140 of the Act, all other aspects whether application under Section 166 of the Act is maintainable or nor and/or other aspects on merits are not required to be considered, therefore, it is requested to dismiss the present appeal. 4. We have heard the learned Advocates FA/2703/2007 4/7 JUDGMENT appearing on behalf of the respective parties. 5. At the outset, it is required to be noted that what is challenged in the present appeal is the order passed by the learned Tribunal in allowing the application submitted by the claimant under Section 140 of the Act i.e. for getting amount under 'No fault liability'. Dispute is raised on behalf of the appellant – original opponent – The New Indian Assurance Company Limited with respect to jurisdiction of the learned Tribunal. However, it is required to be noted that the main claim petition is yet pending before the learned Tribunal and any further detailed discussion and/or expressing any opinion with respect to jurisdiction of the learned Tribunal may effect either parties at the time of deciding the claim petition and therefore, we refrain from further entering into merits of the case and touching the dispute with respect to jurisdiction of the learned Tribunal leaving it to be decided by the learned Tribunal at the time of deciding the application under Section 166 of the Act. However, it will be in the fitness of things and in the FA/2703/2007 5/7 JUDGMENT interest of all concerned that the amount already deposited by the appellant herein pursuant to the order passed by the learned Tribunal passed below Exh.3 be directed to be invested in the name of the original claimant initially for a period of 3(three) years and the original claimant may be permitted to withdraw interest accrued thereon. If such an order is passed, it will meet the ends of justice. 6. At this stage, Mr.Hiren Modi, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant has submitted that he would not have any objection if such an order is passed. However, as the claim petition is of year 2004 and as the claimant has lost only bread earner an appropriate order be passed to expedite the hearing of the main claim petition. 7. Under the circumstances, present appeal is disposed of by directing the learned Tribunal to invest entire amount already deposited by the appellant herein, deposited pursuant to the order passed below Exh-3 impugned in the present appeal in Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized Bank in the name of the original claimant initially for a period of FA/2703/2007 6/7 JUDGMENT 3(three) years on condition that the original claimant shall not be entitled to withdraw any amount from the said Fixed Deposit and shall not be permitted to take any loan on the said Fixed Deposit. However, she shall be permitted to withdraw periodical interest on the said Fixed Deposit. Original Fixed Deposit receipt shall be retained by the learned Tribunal. It is also made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merits touching the jurisdiction aspect in favour of either parties. It will be open for the appellant herein to submit before the learned Tribunal at the time of deciding main claim petition that the learned Tribunal had no jurisdiction and it will also be open for the original claimant to make submission that the learned Tribunal would have jurisdiction. Ultimately, it is for the learned Tribunal to consider the same in accordance with law and on its own merits without in any way being influenced by the order passed below Exh-3 and the present order. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the accident is of the FA/2703/2007 7/7 JUDGMENT year 2003, subject to cooperation of all concerned, the learned Tribunal is directed to decide and dispose of the main claim petition i.e.M.A.C.P.No.493 of 2004 as early as possible. 9. With these, present appeal is disposed of. In view of disposal of the main First Appeal and the aforesaid order, no further order is required to be passed in Civil Application No.7575 of 2007 and is accordingly disposed of. [J.R.Vora,J.] [M.R.Shah,J.] satish