Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahesh Bhagwati - (1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment dated 21st December, 2006, whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur passed an award of Rs. 52,000/ - in favour of Rajan through his mother Smt. Sugan Kanwar and against the appellant Ramesh Kumar.
(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the impugned judgment and the order sheets recorded by the Tribunal from time to time, it is revealed that albeit the Tribunal decreed an amount of Rs. 52,000/ - in favour of Smt. Sugan Kanwar and against the appellant Ramesh Kumar, yet held the Insurance Company to make the payment of the amount under the award and thereafter empowered the Insurance Company to recover or realize the said amount from the appellant Ramesh Kumar Jain. Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the judgment of the Tribunal only on one ground that the claim petition was decided without affording an opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Learned counsel took me through the order sheets of 21st December, 2006 as also the relevant portion of the impugned judgment and contended that on the one hand the presence of the counsel for the appellant was recorded on 21st December, 2006 in the order sheet and on the other hand, on the statement of HKG Motwani, it was recorded that none was present on behalf of the appellant non claimant No. 1. He also submitted that albeit the statement of HKG Motwani, NAW -1 was recorded on 21st December, 2006, but there is not even a whisper of this fact in the order sheet recorded by the Tribunal on 21st December, 2006. Both, the order sheet and the fact of the absence of the counsel for the appellant non claimant No. 1 recorded in the statement of Motwani are contradictory to each other, yet neither the Tribunal passed the order to proceed ex -part against the appellant nor afforded an opportunity of hearing to him and in his absence sans assigning any cogent reason, decided the claim petition arbitrarily. Hence, the impugned judgment is liable to be set -aside and the appeal deserves to be allowed.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the Insurance company submits that in case the matter is remitted to the Tribunal and the appellant is granted an opportunity to lead the evidence in support of his case, then the Insurance Company should also be equally given an opportunity to defend its case.;