1. By way of this appeal, appellant has challenged the order dated 28.07.2005 passed below Exh.5 in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.925 of 2000, filed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gondal, whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the application.
2. Learned advocate for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal ought to have considered the ration laid down by this Court in case of Payalben Vs. Jayeshbhai reported in 2003 ACJ 1736, wherein this Court has held that the application under Section 140 can be allowed, even in case of applicant's own negligency. He has further submitted that vehicle was not owned by the claimant, it was owned by Nagjibhai Ranabhai Ramani.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record as well as order passed by the Tribunal below application, filed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In view of the observations made by the Tribunal in Paragraph No.4 of the order, passed below Exh.5 in MACP No.925 of 2000, appropriate remedy can be availed, if the proceedings are remanded back to the Tribunal with a direction to decide the same within stipulated time.
4. Therefore, the matter is remanded to the Tribunal. The Tribunal is directed to decide the matter, within one year from the date of receipt of this order. However, to protect the interest of the original applicants, the deposited amount will remain deposited in FDR and interest accrued thereon will not be disbursed to the original claimants. The entire amount will be given to the party, who succeeds in the claim proceeding. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. The R & P to be sent back to the Tribunal forthwith.
..mitesh..
[K.S.JHAVERI, J.]