Partly allowed

Smt Gulab Devi and Ors. v. Suva Lal and Ors.

Rajasthan HC19 Mar 2015CMA/856/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the appeal in part. It quashed and set aside the lower Tribunal's award concerning issue no.1 due to a failure to consider facts and objections, directing a fresh hearing on that specific issue.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of lower Tribunal's award on issue no.1 and remanding the matter for a fresh hearing on that specific issue.

Smt Gulab Devi and Ors. Vs Suva Lal and Ors. — Rajasthan HC (2015) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

¶2

J U D G M E N T

¶3

S.B.Civil Misc. Appeal No.856/2004 (Smt.Gulab Devi and ors. Vs. Suva Lal and ors.) DATE OF JUDGMENT : 19.03.2015

¶4

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶5

Mr.Sandeep Mathur, for appellant. Mr.Sukh Ram Jatav, for respondent-Insc.Comp..

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties and after hearing them at length, this appeal is being disposed of at this stage.

¶7

Brief facts of the case are that this appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 10.2.2004 passed by the Judge, MACT, Jaipur District, Jaipur.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant/s submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award has not taken into consideration the objections which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal. The learned Tribunal has decided the issue no.3 to 5 in the light of issue no.1 which is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal qua issue no.1 be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh in the light of objections which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal.

¶9

E Converso, the learned counsel for the respondent/s defended the impugned award and stated the same to be just and apposite.

¶10

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned award.

¶11

In my considered view, the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award has not gone through the facts of the case and passed the impugned award surreptitiously. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal needs interference by this court.

¶12

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua issue no.1 is quashed and set aside with the direction to the learned Tribunal to decide the matter afresh as early as possible, qua issue no.1 in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the appellants in the aforesaid appeal and the aforesaid judgment, if applicable and other judgments to be cited by learned counsel for the parties, if any, after issuing notice to all the concerned parties and giving opportunity of hearing to them.

¶13

Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 30.9.2015.

¶14

(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J.

¶15

Sandeep/-111

¶16

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being e-mailed. SANDEEP RAWAT,Sr.P.A.

Smt Gulab Devi and Ors. v. Suva Lal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gulab Devi and Ors. v. Suva Lal and Ors.

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

Satyaveer Vs Sandeep Kumar and Ors.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kailash Chand and Another

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Vikesh Bathla and Others

Geeta Meena Vs Phool Khan and Ors.

Damodar Vs Narpat Singh and Ors.

Lekhraj Vs Naiem Khan and Ors.