AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Parihar, J.—In a claim petition filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kota, ex parte proceedings were drawn against the petitioners on 29.11.1995. Thereafter, an award was passed by the Tribunal on 4.6.1999 thereby allowing a claim of Rs. 2 lacs in favour of the respondent-claimant.
(2). An application for setting aside ex parte award was filed before the Tribunal on 25.8.2000 along with an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay. Both the applications were dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 29.9.2000. Hence, the present writ petition, challenging not only the award dated 4.6.1999 but also the order dated 29.9.2000.
(3). After hearing counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record as also the impugned award and the order.
(4). The Tribunal, while rejecting the application for setting aside ex parte proceedings, has given detailed reasons for not accepting the application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act as also for restoration. The reasons given by the petitioners for not appearing before the Tribunal are also contradictory and do not gather any confidence of even this court. After having considered entire facts and circumstances of the present case, I find no ground for any further interference of this court in the present writ petition. Even otherwise, as per recent judgment of Supreme Court in case of "Sadhana Lodh v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. (1)" Transport and Accidents Cases page 26), writ petitions under Article 226/227 of the Constitution are not maintainable in such matters. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having no merit.