Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J. - (1.) Though this is an appeal of the year 1997, none appears for New India Assurance Company Limited though 22 years have elapsed.
(2.) This appeal at the behest of claimant challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated 14.2.1997 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Agra, in M.A.C.P. No.352 of 1992.
(3.) Facts are not necessary in the case as the accident is admitted. The Insurance company has not appeared before this Court. The owner accepted the accident but the Tribunal in misreading of facts rejected the claim petition. The vehicle was insured is proved by and is born out from the documents produced in the record. The Tribunal could not have taken a different view and change its view taken by R.M. Rai, who had held in favour of the claimant vide order dated 9.3.1993. The application under Order 6 Rule 17 was given only with a view to add the insurance company, which was granted and reply was also filed by the Insurance company, wherein it did not take the stand that the vehicle was not involved. The A.D.J. could not have re-appreciated the evidence and non suited the claimant. This is a second matter where I find that this Tribunal (Sri A.A. Siddiqui) is in a habit of re-appreciating evidence and taking a contrary vVs. Satnam Singh,2018 1 ADJ 414. I have deprecated the habit of re-appreciating and rejecting the claim petition and taking a contrary view then that taken earlier by the Tribunal presided over by another Judge. Hence the appeal will have to succeed.;