- (1.) Heard counsel for petitioner.
(2.) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal 9th Additional District Judge, Muzaffer Nagar has by its order dated 28-10-2002, allowed application filed by Claimant respondent No. 2 Tej Pal Singh under Order 9 Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC for recalling order dated 19-12-2000 in Misc. Case No. 12 of 1998 for restoration of claim petition, which was dismissed in default on 19-12-1997, and has restored Misc. Case No. 12 of 1998 to its original number. The said order dated 28-10-2002, is under challenge in this writ petition.
(3.) Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon a decision of Division Bench of this Court in Nanhi Bai v. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Banda, 1996 Acc CJ 1153 : (1996 AIHC 3361) holding that all the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure have not been made applicable before the Tribunal and that only the provisions, specified under Rule 21 of U.P. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Rules, 1967, are applicable. Neither Order 9, Rule 9 nor Section 151 CPC has been made applicable to the proceedings for restoration of application dismissed in default. According to the Division Bench, the provisions appear to have been deliberately excluded from application and that it is a case of cosus omissus.;