D.N.Patel - (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi dated 22nd September, 2007 in Compensation Case No. 91 of 2004 (Annexure-3), whereby the Tribunal has rejected the amendment petition preferred by the original claimant and the amendment of the claim of petitioner has been decided on merits instead of deciding whether the amendment should be allowed or not in the claim petition.
(2.) I have heard Ms. Niyati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who has vehemently submitted that the Tribunal has committed gross error in law in deciding the amendment on merits. The Tribunal ought to have decided whether amendment should be allowed or not in the motor accident claim petition, but the merits cannot be gone into at this stage. The original claimant has added that additional expenses incurred by the original claimant because of the treatment of the original claimant was going on and, therefore, additional amount of Rs.5,03,000 was demanded because of medical expenses being incurred. At the amendment stage, the Tribunal cannot go into the merit of the matter of the original claimant. Such energy ought to be kept reserved for final hearing. This is an error apparent on the face of the record and, hence, the impugned order at Annexure- 3 deserves to be quashed and asset aside. Mr. Alok Lal, Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the Tribunal has otherwise also power to make variation in the claim of the original claimant, looking to the expenditure incurred by the original claimant and, therefore, at this stage there was no need for amendment and, therefore, the impugned order rejecting the amendment application is true, correct, legal and in consonance with the facts of law. Having heard the Counsel for the parties and looking to the facts of the case. I hereby quash and set aside the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 22nd September, 2007 in Compensation Case No. 91 of 2007 (Annexure-3 to the menu of petition) on the following facts and reasons: (i) The petitioner is an original claimant who has instituted Motor Vehicle Compensation Case No. 91 of 2004 for compensation under several heads for the injuries sustained by him. (ii) It appears that during pendency of this writ petition, additional expenses have been incurred as medical expenditure as stated in the amendment petition and, therefore, the amendment petition was filed on 22nd of September, 2007 for amending the claim of the original claim. It is stated that Rs.5,03,000 has been incurred towards medical expenses. The Tribunal has not properly appreciated that when any amendment petition is preferred, the merits of the amendment cannot be gone into but the Tribunal ought to have appreciated that whether amendment is in consonance with the original allegations leveled in the motor vehicle accident claims petition. Instead of going into this aspect of the matter, the Tribunal has dismissed the petition of the original claimant and has decided on merits that such claim at this stage not tenable. This is an error on the face of the record. (iii) When any party sustains additional expenses incurred towards medical expenditure during pendency of the motor accident claims petition and such a claim is brought to the notice of the Tribunal by way of amendment petition, it should be allowed by the Tribunal so that at the time of final hearing with much care and accuracy, the claim can be decided by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Such type of amendment is helpful to the Trial Court in accurately deciding the dispute between the parties. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the Tribunal.
(3.) IN this view of the fact, I hereby set aside the impugned order dated 22nd September, 2007 passed in Compensation Case No. 91 of 2004 and I hereby allow this amendment petition directing the Tribunal to decide the claim of the present petitioner i.e. original claimant on its own merit and without being influenced by the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and also by this order. This petition is accordingly allowed and disposed off.;