Vijender Singh Malik, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision petition brought by Respondent No. 1, M/s Himalayan Gas Agency, under the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 16.9.2011 (Annexure P3) passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide which the application of the Petitioner for permission to lead additional evidence has been dismissed.
(2.) PREETI Sharma, Respondent No. 1, had brought a claim petition for compensation under the provisions of Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') against Bhupinder Singh, the driver of the truck bearing registration No. HP -64 -8811, the Petitioner, the owner of the said truck and the New India Assurance Company Limited, the insurer of the truck. In the said claim petition, the Petitioner filed an application for permission to lead additional evidence for examining concerned clerk from the Regional Transport Authority, Solan alongwith record of Registration Certificate of the said vehicle in the name of M/s Himalayan Gas Agency, the owner of the said truck and also the driver of the said vehicle. It is averred that Respondent No. 3, the insurer has been granted permission to examine a witness in additional evidence vide order dated 9.3.2011 and after examination of that witness, necessity arose to rebut the said evidence. Therefore, prayer is made for examination of the aforesaid witnesses for just and proper decision of the claim petition. It is added that no prejudice would be caused to the other party if the application was allowed.
(3.) WHILE the claimant endorsed no objection to the prayer, Respondent No. 3 has opposed the application claiming the same to be not maintainable. It is further averred that the allowing of the application would amount to reopening of the case. It is further averred that the Petitioner cannot be allowed to lead evidence to rebut the evidence of co -respondent.;