Prima facie, the Tribunal has observed in para 24 as under:
"24.
It is to be noted here that the opponent No.4 has not produced any documentary evidence regarding the valid and effective driving licence of the driver of the Motorcycle No. GJ-3AR-671. The opponent No.4 has heavily relied on the deposition of injured Dilipbhai Chhaganbhai Kaladiya who was driving the motorcycle at the time of accident. He has specifically stated in the cross-examination that he was not holding a licence at the time of accident. Considering the cross-examination of the injured Dilipbhai Chhangabhai, it can be said that he was not holding valid and effective license at the time of accident. It is to be noted here that the heirs and dependents of Arvind alias Ashwin Harsukhbhai have filed C.C. No. 560/'06 under the provisions of Section 163-A of the M.V. Act. Considering the provisions of Sec. 163-A and observations made by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd., vs. P. Saguna wd/o P. Balkrishana & Ors., reported in 2008 (1) GLH 616 and New India Assurance Co. Ltd., vs. Manisha Mahendra alias Shankaer Joshi & Ors., reported in 2008(2) GLH 12, I am of the view that the opponent No. 4 i.e. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd, is liable to pay the amount of compensation to the petitioner. Hence, all the opponents in C.C. No. 560/'06 are liable to pay the amount of compensation to the petitioners."
Looking to the above, Insurance Company is required to be exonerated. However, none appears for the owner. The amount is required to be recover from the owner, viz., Dilipbhai Chhaganbhai Kaladiya. In the interest of justice, matter is adjourned to 29.03.2012.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru* Top