JUDGMENT 1. - This petition is directed against order dated 9.4.14 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II), Udaipur ('the Tribunal'), whereby an application preferred by the petitioner under Order 11, Rule 12 & 14 read with Section 151 CPC seeking directions to the respondents-claimants for discovery and production of information and documents, stands rejected. 2. The relevant facts are that one Shri Kamalnayan Lasod, the husband of first respondent, father of second & third respondent and son of fourth respondent, succumbed to the injuries suffered as a result of motor vehicle accident. The respondents-claimants filed a claim petition inter alia with the averments that the deceased was employed as Vice President (Project) in a company M/s. Rewati Cement Private Limited, Satna and was earning a sum of Rs. 24,00,000/- per annum as salary. 3. The claim petition is being contested by the petitioner- Assurance Company by filing a counter thereto. The factum of annual income of the deceased quantified at Rs. 24,00,000/- is denied by the petitioner-Assurance Company and it is stated that the claimant must prove the facts pleaded in this regard by producing documentary evidence. 4. During the pendency of the petition, the petitioner- Assurance Company preferred an application under Order 11, Rule 12 & 14 read with Section 151 CPC seeking directions to the respondents-claimants for discovery/production of the following information/documents: (i) the compensation or any other benefits, if any, given by the employer of the deceased, the amount of pension, if any, given by the employer to the respondents-claimants (ii) the employment, if any, given by the employer to the dependent of the deceased (iii) the financial status of the respondents-claimants at the time of filing of the claim petition and at present (iv) the details of the movable and immovable property of the deceased, which stood transferred to the respondents-claimants, (v) the benefits, if any, accrued to the claimants out of LIC or Personal Accident Policy etc. of the deceased, the procedure adopted by the employer while appointing the deceased, his condition of service, appointment letter, attendance detail and the accounts maintained by the employer in respect of the salary and other benefits extended to the deceased, (vi) the income tax returns, profit & loss account and the documents and statements annexed with the income tax return of the deceased and (vii) other facts relating to financial loss and gain accrued to the claimants after the accidental death. 5. The Tribunal rejected the application observing that the information/documents sought for are mostly based on imaginary facts and the remaining are the facts related to the defence of the Assurance Company, which are required to be proved by it on the basis of oral and documentary evidence. The Tribunal observed that merely on the basis of imaginary facts, the claimants cannot be directed to discover and produce the documents. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Tribunal has seriously erred in rejecting the application observing that the documents sought to be discovered/produced from the claimants are related to the defences of the petitioner company. Learned counsel submitted that if the documents are relevant for the purposes of deciding the controversy involved, the party to the proceeding in possession thereof can always be directed to make discovery on oath of the documents which are or have been in his possession or power. Learned counsel submitted that precisely, the question relevant while deciding the application preferred under Order 11, Rule 12 & 14 CPC is as to whether the documents sought to be discovered/produced are related to the dispute involved in the matter or not. Learned counsel submitted that for determination of the amount of compensation, if any, payable to the respondents-claimants, it is absolutely necessary that all relevant documents in this regard are produced on record. Learned counsel submitted that the documents annexed to the income tax returns of the deceased, the terms and conditions of his appointment and the benefits extended by the employer to the respondents-claimants on account of the death of the employee, are relevant for the purpose of determination of the compensation and therefore, the Tribunal has erred in rejecting the application without considering the relevant aspects of the matter. 7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record. 8. 7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record. 8. A perusal of the claim petition reveals that the claimants have claimed that the deceased was working as General Manager in Rewati Cement Pvt. Limited and was earning a sum of Rs. 24,00,000/- per annum. The averments made on behalf of the claimants as aforesaid, are denied by the petitioner- Assurance Company by filing a counter to the claim petition but then, it is not the case of the petitioner-Assurance Company that the petitioner has received any compensation or pensionary benefits from the employer of the deceased. Moreover, it is for the claimants to prove the income of the deceased and obviously, the quantum of compensation shall be determined by the Tribunal on the basis of the facts proved. In any case, in absence of any pleadings in this regard, the petitioner-Assurance Company cannot be permitted to invoke the provisions of Order 11, Rule 12 & 14 CPC so as to enter into a roving inquiry for fishing out the information which may and may not be relevant to the controversy involved. In the considered opinion of this court, having regard to the nature of proceedings, after due examination of the matter in its entirety and objectivity, the order impugned passed by the Tribunal rejecting the application preferred by the petitioner-Assurance Company does not suffer from any infirmity, illegality or jurisdictional error so as to warrant interference by this court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 9. In the result, the petition fails, it is hereby dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******