Allahabad High Court
Wahid Ali vs State Of U.P. And 7 Others on 19 September, 2023
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:180819
Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24438 of 2023
Petitioner :- Wahid Ali
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Nasim Ahmad
Counsel for Respondent :- CSC
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr.Mohd. Nasim Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the impugned judgment and award dated 27.02.2023 vide which the application of the petitioner has been rejected.
Brief facts of the case are that an incident took place on 14.04.2016, when Irfan @ Babu (husband of respondent no.2) alongwith his daughter, Babboo was going on motorcycle. A three wheeler bearing Registration No.UP21 AN 2254 was being rashly and negligently driven by the driver. In the aforesaid incident, injuries were sustained by Irfan @ Babu and his motorcycle was also damaged. Therefore, a claim petition was filed claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- alongwith 18% p.a. interest from the petitioner treating him to be owner of the vehicle. The tribunal awarded Rs.7,35,000/- alongwith 6% simple interest vide judgment and order dated 03.01.2020. Thereafter, the respondent nos.2 to 7 filed an application under Section 174 of M.V. Act for recovery of the award amount, pursuant to which the Tehsildar Sadar, Moradabad has issued recovery warrant on 03.09.2022 against the petitioner for recovering the amount of Rs.7,67,000/-. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a recall application alongwith application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for recalling the order dated 03.01.2020 alleging therein that the petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle with which the accident occurred. However, the aforesaid recall application was dismissed vide order dated 12.01.2023 in a mechanical manner. Subsequently, the petitioner had placed a report from the Divisional Transport Office provided through R.T.I. wherein the said vehicle is said to have been registered in the name of the petitioner due to technical error. The aforesaid report from the Divisional Transport Officer has been annexed at page 8 to the supplementary affidavit in support of this petition. The petitioner moved another application alongwith the aforesaid information regarding the technical error as done by the concerned department in registering the vehicle in question in the name of petitioner and requested the Tribunal to hear the matter afresh considering the aforesaid fact. However, the said application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 27.03.2023 in a mechanical manner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is neither the owner of the vehicle nor has anything to do with the accident, which took place due to which Irfan @ Babu was injured. He further submits that the impugned order has been passed in a mechanical manner due to fault of R.T.O. Office which has wrongly registered the vehicle in the name of the petitioner. There is no dispute as to the ownership of the vehicle but it is due to clerical or typographical error of the department due to which the petitioner has been considered the owner of the vehicle and directed to pay half the amount as awarded vide order dated 03.01.2020. Therefore, the order impugned is liable to the set aside.
Learned Standing Counsel could not dispute the aforesaid submissions.
In view of the aforesaid, no useful purpose will be served to keep this writ petition pending and calling for a counter affidavit.
Under such circumstances, the impugned order dated 27.03.2023 passed by the Presiding Officer/Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Moradabad is set aside. The matter is remitted to thePresiding Officer/Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Moradabad, who in turn, shall decide the application no.25GA filed by the petitioner, afresh, in accordance with law, after hearing all the parties including the concerned department, by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands allowed.
Order Date :- 19.9.2023
Jitendra/-
