IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 34 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- LALJIBHAI CHOLDAS PATEL Versus MADHAVJIBHAI MOHANBHAI -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR MUKESH A PATEL for Petitioner MR DM THAKKAR for MR YM THAKKAR for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of decision: 16/02/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT #. Rule. Mr.D.M.Thakkar waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1. The respondent No.2 is neither necessary or proper party to this civil revision application and his name is ordered to be struck of from the title of the civil revision application. The office is directed to make necessary correction in the cause title of the civil revision application forthwith. #. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar, under the impugned order, ordered that the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of it till final disposal of the Execution Petition. He was further directed to submit his International Passport, if any, before the Tribunal. A copy of that order was also ordered to be sent to the Regional Passport Authority, Ahmedabad, with direction to implement that order and to suspend the International Passport, if issued in the name of the petitioner. #. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the claimant-respondent No.1 filed Motor Accident Claims Petition No.48 of 1994 against the petitioner and the driver in which on 8.6.98, an award of Rs.80,000/= with interest thereon has been made. The claimant has taken this award in execution by filing Darkhast No.97 of 1999. As he was having apprehension that this owner of vehicle may leave India, the claimant filed an application below ex.8 on which the order impugned in this revision application has been passed. #. Against the award of the Tribunal, the petitioner has already filed Appeal in this Court being F.A.(S.T.) No.490 of 2000. In the Appeal, the petitioner has deposited Rs.25,000/= in this court on 5.2.2000. This court directed the petitioner that he has to deposit the balance amount of award in the court and then only any relief can be granted and not otherwise. Today, the petitioner deposited Rs.1,12,000/= in the court in this revision application. #. The learned Tribunal has passed the impugned order only to see that the petitioner may not run away without making payment of the award amount. So it is in fact a some sort of `Garnishee' order and now when the amount of award has been deposited in this court, whatever apprehension the claimant was having now no more survives. After deposit of this award amount in this court, the order of the learned Tribunal dated 11.1.2000 cannot be allowed to stand. In case the order of the learned Tribunal is not set aside or allowed to stand, it will occasion failure of justice to the petitioner as even after deposit of the award amount, he will be deprived from going abroad where his wife is reported to be staying and also ill. #. In the result, this civil revision application succeeds and the same is allowed. The order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar, dated 11.1.2000 below ex.8 in Darkhast No.97 of 1999 is quashed and set aside. The office is directed to invest the amount of Rs.1,12,000/= deposited by petitioner in this court in the Fixed Deposit for a period of one year. So far as the amount of Rs.25,000/= is concerned, it is deposited in the First Appeal, for investment of which, this court cannot pass any order. This order, however, will be subject to the order, if any, passed in this respect by the Division Bench in the Appeal filed by petitioner. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. ....... [sunil]