Amit Kalra and Anr vs Shyam Sunder and and Another

G. P. Mittal, J.—The Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 30.07.2011 whereby the right of leading evidence by the Petitioner who was the owner of alleged offending vehicle was closed subject to the condition that he would be granted one opportunity to lead evidence subject to cost of `10,000/-.

It may be noticed that this claim petition was instituted in the year 2003 and was fixed for the evidence of the Petitioner and the Respondent insurance company sometime in the year 2008 for the first time.

On perusal of the order sheets, copies of which have been placed on the record, would show that there was no default on the part of the Petitioner in producing his evidence except that the list of witnesses had not been filed in time and the Petitioner wanted to summon the witnesses being official witnesses. The order imposing cost of `10,000/- and giving only one opportunity to the Petitioner to complete his evidence was not justified. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. It is made clear that the Petitioner shall not be granted more than three opportunities to produce his evidence. He shall obtain the summons Dasti in addition to ordinary process and shall get the summons served upon the witnesses at his own responsibility. If the witness/witnesses do not appear in spite of the service, the Court shall be at liberty to take coercive action to ensure their attendance.

The petition is disposed of with the above directions.

The parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal on 17.02.2012 on which date the Claims Tribunal shall fix a date for production of the witnesses by the Petitioner. Copy of the order be sent to the Claims Tribunal immediately.

Dasti also as prayed.