V.S. Aggarwal, J. - (1.) BY this common judgment, both the appeals, namely, F.A.O. No. 501 and 500 of 1986 can conveniently be disposed of together. Both the appeals are directed against a common award passed by the Motor Accident. Claims Tribunal, Amritsar dated 12.3.1986. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 38,000/ - to Sajjan Singh Subedar respondent and Rs. 12,000/ - to Kantian respondent in two different claim petitions.
(2.) IT becomes unnecessary to recite the detail facts because the short argument advanced is that the learned Tribunal did not allow the appellant - Insurance Company to lead additional evidence to prove that the driving licence of the driver of the offending vehicle was a fake one. On careful consideration of the matter, the Court is of the considered opinion that the application seeking additional evidence before the learned Tribunal was rightly rejected. This was rejected on the ground that is was highly belated. In the peculiar facts of the case, it was so done. No party has any inherent right to delay and prolong the trial. This fact was very must (much ?) in controversy and in all fairness the attempt should have been made in the first instance to prove that the licence of the driver of the offending vehicle was fake. The same has not been done. When at the belated stage such an application had been moved, it could not have been entertained. No other argument had been raised. As a result thereto, the appeals must fail and are dismissed.
(3.) APPEAL dismissed.;