AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr. A.K. Mangal, learned Counsel for appellant.
None appears for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. However, power of Mr. R.S. Morya and Mr. Avadh Singh, Advocate is filed.
Mr. M.P. Agarwal, learned Counsel for the newly added respondent No. 3, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Heard finally alongwith application I.A. No. 8627/1998 made by appellant under Order 41 Rule 27, C.P.C for taking certain documents on record.
This appeal is u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 filed by the appellant whose claim has been dismissed in toto by the Tribunal. The Tribunal while holding that the accident in question, took place with a tractor bearing registration No. R.J.-11-R-0025, dismissed the claim on the ground that the identity of its owner, insurer and driver could not be established. Now the appellant has filed documents which purports to be registration certificate and the insurance documents of the said offending vehicle. From these documents, it is clear that the said tractor was owned by respondent No. 1 Kaptan Singh and was insured with the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. on the date of the accident. However, the insurer having been impleaded for the first time in this Court, it appears just and proper to remand the case back to the Tribunal below so as to enable respondent No. 3 to defend the claim on the grounds available to it in law. The Insurance Company may also seek permission in terms of Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Accordingly, we allow the appeal as also the Application 8627/1998, set aside the impugned award and direct that the case shall now go back to 5th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Morena for decision afresh. The Tribunal below shall admit the two documents filed before this Court, and after giving opportunity to the parties to lead additional evidence, if any decide the claim afresh, in accordance with law. The documents filed with the application shall also be forwarded to the Tribunal below along with the records of the case immediately so as to reach before 7th May, 2003.
Should there be further delay in the matter, the parties present before this Court are directed to remain present before the Tribunal on 7.5.2003.
This appeal thus stands disposed of but without any orders as to costs.