Remanded

Balabhadra Biswal v. Saroj Ku.Mandala

Orissa HC9 Oct 2015MACA/1143/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Supercession of this appeal against dismissal of the claim application due to non prosecution by the Tribunal. The Cuppa seal is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal. The parties are given a chance to adduce further evidence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned award set aside; matter remitted to the First Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nayagarh, for fresh disposal within four months.

Balabhadra Biswal Vs Saroj Ku.Mandala — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2015)

¶1

M.A.C.A. No.1143 of 2012

¶2

05. 09.10.2015 Cost of Rs.500/- is stated to have paid.
 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶3

 This appeal by the claimants is directed against the j
udgment/award dated 05.1.2012, passed by the learned Fifth Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nay
agarh, in M.A.C. No.66 of 2009, dismissing the claim application and passing NIL award.

¶4

 Learned counsel for the claimants-respondents submits that the
 claim application has been dismissed on the ground of non-prosecution. In this regard, it is
submitted that as the conducting counsel failed to take step on the date fixed, learned Tribun
al proceeded to reject the claim application. It is submitted that the claims made by the clai
mants cannot suffer for the fault of the advocate.

¶5

 Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the pa
rties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the impugned award is set
aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned Tribunal to dispose of the same afresh, a
fter providing opportunity of hearing to the parties.

¶6

 It is open for the parties to adduce further evidence
in support of their respective cases and take all such pleas as are available to them in law,
which shall be considered by the learned Tribunal on its own merits and in accordance with law
.

¶7

 As the claim is of the year 2009, learned Tribunal shall do we
ll to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four m
onths from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶8

M.A.C.A. is accordingly disposed of.

¶9

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶10

 S.C.Parija, J.

¶11

Balabhadra Biswal v. Saroj Ku.Mandala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balabhadra Biswal v. Saroj Ku.Mandala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Icici Lombard G.I.C.Ltd. Vs Rashmi Rekha Biswal

Legal Manager,H.D.F.C.,Ergo G.I.Co.Ltd. Vs Uttam Ku.Barik

ILandFS Skills Develop Vs Automotivesipvt.Lt

Asst.Managerlegal,M/S.Cholamandalam Ms G.I.Co.Ltd. Vs Sunita Devi

Asst.Vice President,Iffco-Tokio G.I.C.Ltd. Vs Jyotsna Sahoo

Runu Nayak Vs Satyanarayan Sahoo