Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 674 (MP)

Sanjaynath v. Lakshmichandra

2010-07-09

PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA

body2010
ORDER 1. This appeal is filed by the appellants under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against an Award dated 25.3.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, [Fast Track Court], Shujalpur, District Shajapur in Claim Case No. 76/2007. 2. The original claimant Sanjaynath had suffered injuries in an accident which had taken place on 19.7.2006. Accordingly he had filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal and the Claims Tribunal awarded a Sun1 of Rs. 3,45,393-00 to the original claimant along with the interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the claim petition. 3. At the commencement of the argument, learned counsel appearing for the original claimant pointed out that during the pendency of this appeal, on 28.6.2009 the original claimant had died and his legal representatives have been brought on record. He has also submitted that I.A. No. 1598/2010 has been filed by the appellants for amendment of the claim petition and to incorporate the plea that the original claimant Sanjaynath has died due to the injuries received in the accident. 4. The said application is opposed by the counsel for the respondent No.3 -- Insurance Company. 5. The evidence on record indicate that the original claimant had suffered serious injuries in the accident. On account of the injuries, he had suffered paralysis of the lower part of the body. The fact that the original claimant has died is not in dispute. Whether he has died due to injuries received in accident or for some other reason is a matter of evidence. 6. Considering the entire circumstances of the case I.A. No. 1598/2010 is allowed and the appellants are permitted to amend the claim petition. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has also pressed I.A. No. 957/2010, which is an application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC for permission to bring the additional documents on-record. By this application, the appellants want to place on record the additional documents to show that the death of the original claimant had taken place on account of the injuries received in the accident. Since the amendment application has been allowed by this Court, therefore, I.A. No. 957/2010 is also allowed. 8. By this application, the appellants want to place on record the additional documents to show that the death of the original claimant had taken place on account of the injuries received in the accident. Since the amendment application has been allowed by this Court, therefore, I.A. No. 957/2010 is also allowed. 8. Since after the amendment of the claim petition the nature of claim has changed and the appellants are required to establish their case that the death had taken place because of the accident, therefore, the impugned Award passed by the Claims Tribunal is set-aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal to pass a fresh Award after giving the parties an opportunity to further amend their pleadings, if so required, and give them further opportunity to lead evidence. However, it is made clear that if the original claimant/appellants have received any amount in pursuance to the impugned Award passed by the Tribunal, then they will not be required to refund the same and it will be adjusted in the fresh Award passed by the Tribunal. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 16.8.2010. The original record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back immediately along with the copies of the applications filed by the appellants under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC and under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC being I.A. No. 957/2010 and I.A. No. 1598/2010. 9. The appeal is accordingly disposed off.