Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 147 (RAJ)

Reena v. Nandkishore

2020-01-16

PRAKASH GUPTA

body2020
JUDGMENT : Prakash Gupta, J. 1. This Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the claimants against the judgment and award dated 5.11.2018 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, Bundi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in MAC Case No. 328/2008 (CIS 328/2008), by which a sum of Rs. 4,08,000/- have been awarded in favour of claimants and against the non claimants respondents. 2. Facts of the case are that on 15.5.2008 at about 8.15 PM when deceased Devendra Kumar alongwith his relative was coming on motor cycle from Bajad, near Jameetpura Railway Crossing, a Tractor No. RJ 08 R 6959 being driven by its driver rashly and negligently, hit the Motor cycle, as a result of which Devendra Kumar died. 3. The claimants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal. Issues were framed. Evidence was led by both the parties. After hearing the arguments, the learned Tribunal vide its judgment and award dated 13.12.2010, awarded a sum of Rs. 3,59,400/- in favour of the claimants. Against which an appeal was filed before this Court. The Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 17.10.2016 quashed and set-aside the impugned judgment qua issue No. 3 and remanded the matter to the Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh qua issue No. 3. The Tribunal vide its judgment and award dated 5.11.2018 enhanced the amount of compensation to the extent of Rs. 48,600/- (in addition to the amount of Rs. 3,59,400/- already awarded by the Tribunal vide its judgment and award dated 13.12.2010). However, the learned Tribunal taking into consideration the fact that the claimants have given false evidence, has directed to initiate the proceedings against the claimants under Section 193 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed by the claimants. 4. Learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the Insurance Co. filed an application before the tribunal that the claimant appellant No. 1 Smt. Reena had remarried and this fact was not disclosed before the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal directed the counsel for the claimants to file an affidavit with regard to the same. Due to some bona fide mistake, the affidavit was filed with reference to the position of Reena Bai with regard to her marriage at the time of accident. Even also Reena has given the statement that she is still living with her in-laws and has not remarried. Due to some bona fide mistake, the affidavit was filed with reference to the position of Reena Bai with regard to her marriage at the time of accident. Even also Reena has given the statement that she is still living with her in-laws and has not remarried. Smt. Rajesh Bai has not given any statement which can be said to be false. The learned Tribunal merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures by ignoring the directions of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20335/2018, has directed to initiate the proceedings against the claimants under Section 193 IPC. He has further submitted that since Smt. Reena was never cross-examined, her affidavit cannot be read as evidence. Therefore, no proceedings can be initiated against her for giving false evidence. Hence, on this issue impugned judgment and award needs to be modified. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Co. defended the impugned judgment and award and stated the same to be just and proper. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record. 7. It is revealed from the record that learned tribunal has only ordered issue a show cause notice under section 193 IPC. The claimant Smt. Reena will be free to submit reply to the notice and the tribunal shall decide the controversy after hearing both the parties in accordance with law. 8. In this view of the matter, I find no force in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.