Jagar Nath Thakur vs Tirthesh And Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 5338 Del

$~14
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                    Date of decision: 6th September, 2012

+        MAC. APP. No.500/2010

         JAGAR NATH THAKUR                     ..... Appellant
                      Through: Mr.Puneet Khurana, Advocate

                        versus

         TIRTHESH AND ORS                      ..... Respondents
                      Through: Mr.Sahil Aeron, Advocate

         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL

                                 JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant, Jagar Nath Thakur, who is alleged to be the

owner and driver of the offending vehicle No.DL-8SN-3142,

has preferred this Appeal, challenging the impugned award

dated 29.06.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal).

2. In the written statement filed before the Claims Tribunal, the

Appellant disputed the involvement of his vehicle in the

accident. He took up the plea that while he was passing near

Zakhira Flyover, he noticed a crowd and he stopped his two

wheeler to see as to what happened. A lady was lying on the

road with fatal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident

caused by some unknown vehicle. He was falsely implicated in

this case.

3. The Appellant has taken the plea that he was not given

sufficient opportunity to lead evidence before the Claims

Tribunal. This Claim Petition was instituted on 15 th May, 2008.

The Claimant's evidence was completed on 19th May, 2010 and

02.06.2010 was the first date fixed for the Appellant. The

evidence was closed as no witness had been summoned. The

Trial Court record reveals that sufficient opportunity was not

granted to the Appellant to prove his case.

4. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment cannot be

sustained; it is accordingly set aside and the case is remanded

back to the Claims Tribunal for granting an opportunity to the

Appellant to lead his evidence and to decide the case afresh

(including the quantum of compensation) in accordance with

law.

5. The parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal on

09.10.2012.

6. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

7. Pending applications stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE SEPTEMBER 06, 2012 v