The Gujarat High Court has reaffirmed the responsibility of civic bodies to keep public roads safe, dismissing an appeal filed by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC) in a long-running compensation case arising from a fatal road accident caused by a stray bull. The court ruled that the accident itself “spoke for negligence” and upheld the trial court’s finding that the Corporation failed in its statutory duty.
Background of the Case
The case dates back to 27 September 2007, when Makbul Gaffarbhai Ghaniwala, a resident of Vadodara, was riding his motorcycle towards his transport office in the evening. Near the Karelibaug area, opposite Utkarsh Petrol Pump, a stray bull suddenly ran onto the road and struck him with its horns. The impact threw him off the motorcycle, causing severe head injuries.
Read also:- Supreme Court Rejects Curative Pleas in Land Acquisition Case, Says No Grounds Within Limited Review Scope
He was rushed to hospital and remained under medical treatment for nearly two months, undergoing multiple surgeries. Despite prolonged care, his condition did not improve, and he passed away on 29 November 2007. His wife, children, and parents later filed a civil suit seeking damages from the Vadodara Municipal Corporation, alleging negligence in controlling stray cattle on public roads.
Trial Court’s Findings
In 2018, the trial court partly decreed the suit. It held that the accident occurred due to the presence of a stray bull on a public road and applied the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, meaning the circumstances of the accident themselves indicated negligence.
Read also:- Supreme Court Rejects Goregaon Pearl Society's Curative Pleas, Ends Long-Running Housing Dispute
The court found contributory negligence on both sides — attributing 70% liability to the Municipal Corporation and 30% to the deceased rider — and directed the Corporation to pay ₹4.84 lakh with 9% annual interest from the date of filing the suit.
Corporation’s Appeal
Challenging the decision, the Vadodara Municipal Corporation approached the Gujarat High Court, arguing that it was not responsible for removing stray animals from roads. The Corporation claimed that such duties fell primarily on the police under the Bombay Police Act and that it had already provided cattle pounds for impounding animals.
Importantly, the Corporation did not dispute the amount of compensation. Its appeal was limited to questioning the finding of negligence and liability.
Read also:- Supreme Court Mandates Timelines for Oral Arguments, Issues SOP to Streamline Hearings and Cut Delays
High Court’s Observations
Justice M. K. Thakker rejected the Corporation’s arguments, pointing out that municipal authorities have a clear statutory obligation to keep streets free from obstructions, including stray cattle.
“The accident occurred on a public road under the management and control of the Corporation,” the court observed, noting that such incidents do not ordinarily happen if reasonable care is taken. The judge held that the presence of stray cattle on busy roads reflects a failure in preventive measures.
Referring to provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, the court emphasized that the primary duty to ensure road safety rests with the municipal body. “The Corporation, which collects taxes from the public, cannot shift responsibility when public safety is compromised,” the bench remarked.
The court also relied on earlier judicial precedents to explain that negligence in civil law does not require direct proof in every case. When an incident occurs in circumstances that clearly suggest a lack of care, the burden shifts to the authority responsible for management and control.
In this case, the High Court found no convincing explanation from the Corporation as to how a stray bull was allowed to roam freely on a public road. The court concluded that the tragic death could have been avoided had proper steps been taken.
Read also:- Gujarat High Court Quashes Income Tax Reassessment Over ₹37 Cr Bank Entries, Bars Rovin
Decision
Dismissing the appeal, the Gujarat High Court confirmed the trial court’s judgment and compensation award. The bench also issued a significant direction, stating that since public funds were used to pay compensation, the amount should be recovered from the concerned municipal officer found negligent after a proper inquiry.
The court directed the Municipal Commissioner of Vadodara to ensure compliance and submit a report on action taken against the erring officer within three months.
Case Title: Vadodara Municipal Corporation vs Mominaben Malbulbhai Ghaniwala & Ors.
Case No.: First Appeal No. 519 of 2020
Case Type: Civil Appeal (Compensation / Tort Liability)
Decision Date: 17 December 2025
