Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 13 (TRI)

Rakesh Saha v. Subhankar Paul

2015-01-09

DEEPAK GUPTA

body2015
JUDGMENT Deepak Gupta, CJ. 1. Both these appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment since they arise out of the same accident. 2. By means of these appeals, the claimants have challenged the award dated 04-07-2009 passed in T.S.(MAC) 757 of 2002 and T.S.(MAC) 758 of 2002 respectively whereby the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No. 4, West Tripura, Agartala dismissed the claim petitions since the claimants had led no evidence to prove their case. 3. From the records, I find that the claim petitions were filed in the year 2002 and thereafter the Insurance Company appeared on the next day itself but no steps were taken by the claimants to serve the O.P. No. 2 for a long time. Even counsel for the claimants did not appear on a number of dates and the matters were delayed on this count for a number of years. Finally, the issues were framed after five years on 26-06-2007 and the matters were fixed for evidence of the claimants on 26-06-2008. Thereafter, the matters were adjourned to 06-08-2008, 06-11-2008, 03-01-2009, 17-03-2009 and 01-06-2009. The learned Tribunal, in my view, was fully justified in not granting further time. However, keeping in view the fact that the claimants are poor illiterate persons, I feel that they should not suffer and should not be deprived of the compensation which may otherwise be due to them. 4. Therefore, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is given to the claimants to lead their evidence. It is made clear that only one opportunity shall be granted and no more. The parties who are present are directed to appear before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No. 4, West Tripura, Agartala on 11-02-2015 on which date notice shall be issued to respondent No. 2 and it shall be the responsibility of the claimants to ensure that the respondent No. 2 is served. In case, the claimants fail to serve respondent No. 2, then the claim petitions shall be rejected. After respondent No. 2 is served, the learned Tribunal shall give one opportunity only to the claimants to lead their evidence. It is made clear that if the claimants do not lead evidence on the first opportunity, then no further opportunity shall be granted and natural consequences will follow. After respondent No. 2 is served, the learned Tribunal shall give one opportunity only to the claimants to lead their evidence. It is made clear that if the claimants do not lead evidence on the first opportunity, then no further opportunity shall be granted and natural consequences will follow. In case, the claimants lead evidence and finally the claim petitions are decided in their favour, while awarding interest the Tribunal shall take into consideration the fact that the claim petitions have been pending for such a long time due to the negligence of the claimants. 5. With these observations, the appeals stand disposed of. 6. Send down the lower court records forthwith.