Shabihul Hasnain, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Vinay Khare, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri K.N. Yadav, for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
(2.) This petition has been filed against an order dated 12.9.2006 as contained in Annexure 2 by the Claims Tribunal. The review filed by the Petitioner has been dismissed by the impugned order. The Petitioner says that he has filed review on the ground that the award dated 24.11.2005 has been obtained by the Respondents through fraud. He says that any order obtained by fraud vitiates the whole proceedings and accordingly the review should have been entertain by the claims tribunal and the whole case should have been heard once again on merits. In his support the Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the decision in the case of United India Insurance v/s. Rajendra Singh and Ors. : 2000 (2) AWC 1349 (SC). Predictably, the Hon'ble Court has laid down the full principle that fraud vitiates everything.
(3.) I have gone through the order passed by the claims tribunal and I am of the firm view that though the judgment applies to the case in principle but it can be distinguished on facts. Petitioners are simply trying to delay the payment made in the award and the Respondents are suffering. Rights of an individual and that too of a victim of an accident cannot be allowed to be delayed in this manner. If such an application of review are to be maintained by the Claims Tribunal and such awards have to be delayed in a manner of saying, will be a fraud upon the victim .This can not be allowed by this Court. There is no provision in law that review is maintainable before the claims tribunal.;