High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 07 BOM CK 0169

Shri Devendra Naik, Son of Ganpat Naik vs Mr. Oswald Caldeira, Son of Francisco Caldeira

Bombay High Court · Decided on 13 July 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Nutan D. Sardessai, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
First Appeal No.111 Of 2016

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 372 words
1.

Heard Shri A.R.S. Netravalkar, learned Advocate for the appellants for some time and Shri M. Marshal, learned Advocate for the respondent.

2.

Shri A.R.S. Netravalkar, learned Advocate for the appellants pointed out to the Scene of accident Panchanama and the sketch apart from the

Report of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer procured by him under the Right to Information Act, to point out the apparent manipulation in the

Panchanama and the sketch relied upon by the respondent claimant before the learned Tribunal. It appears that the learned Tribunal was swayed

by the Panchanama and the sketch produced by the respondent while appreciating the case of the parties and passed the judgment under challenge.Â

Since a serious dispute is raised in the course of the hearing about the Panchanama and the sketch by Shri A.R.S. Netravalkar, learned Advocate for

the appellants and there being some palpable manipulation observed in the Panchanama and the sketch produced on behalf of the respondent, i deem it

appropriate in the circumstances of the case to remand the matter to the learned Tribunal who shall afford opportunity to the parties herein to lead

appropriate evidence and prove the said documents before it.

3.

Liberty is granted to the appellants to produce the Panchanama and the sketch apart from the 'A' summary report drawn by the Sub-Divisional

Police Officer, Ponda dated 18/07/2003 and the Panchanama and the sketch dated 23/04/2003. The learned MACT to afford adequate opportunity

to the parties to lead evidence including the right of crossexamination and decide the matter afresh. It goes without saying that the impugned

judgment and award is required to be quashed and is thus quashed and set aside and the matter remanded to the learned MACT for a trial, afresh.

4.

Shri A.R.S. Netravalkar, learned Advocate for the appellants seeks leave to replace the original Panchanama and the sketch produced in the above

appeal as per the order dated 08/09/2017 passed in Misc. Civil Application No.703/2017 and to place a photocopy on record in order to enable him to

produce the original records before the MACT, North Goa. Leave granted.

5.

In the result the appeal stands disposed off accordingly.

The parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 01/08/2018.