Partly allowed

Smt Lalita Devi v. Brij Bhushan

Rajasthan HC27 Apr 2016CMA/2390/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil miscellaneous appeal, the High Court quashed and set aside part of a judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal regarding a specific issue. The Court directed the Tribunal to decide the matter afresh after issuing notice and providing a hearing opportunity to all parties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment and award on issue No. 4 was quashed and set aside, with a direction to the Tribunal to decide the matter afresh after issuing notice and giving an opportunity of hearing to all

Smt Lalita Devi Vs Brij Bhushan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR

¶2

BENCH, JAIPUR.

¶3

J U D G M E N T

¶4

S.B.Civil Misc. Appeal No.2390/2005 Smt. Lalita Devi

¶5

vs Mr. Brijbhushan @ Lalu Ram and ors

¶6

DATE OF JUDGMENT : 27/4/2016

¶7

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶8

Mr.K. N. Tiwari for appellant. Mr.Tripurari Sharma and Lokesh Parihar for respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Brief facts of the case are that this appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and award passed by the MACT.

¶11

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 finding of learned Tribunal on issue no/s. 4 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal qua issue no/s. 4 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.

¶12

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent/s though opposed the same but requested that the learned Tribunal may be directed to hear him/them at the time of deciding the matter afresh on the aforesaid issue/s, and he may be permitted to raise all the objections, grounds as have been raised in this appeal.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record

¶14

including the impugned award.

¶15

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.

¶16

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua on issue No/s. 4 is quashed and set aside with the direction to the learned Tribunal to decide the matter afresh as early as possible, qua issue no/s. 4 in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the parties 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.

¶17

Both the parties request for specific date for appearing before the trial court, hence they are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 1/8/2016.

¶18

Record, if any, be sent back.

¶19

(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J.

¶20

¶21

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being E-mailed.

¶22

Om Prakash PA

Smt Lalita Devi v. Brij Bhushan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Lalita Devi v. Brij Bhushan

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

Narendra Kumar Gupta Vs Dr Doongar Singh Pokharana

Narendra Mohan Rajora Vs R S R T C and Anr.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Biram Nath and Ors.

Punit Kapoor Vs Suresh Chandra

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Ramsingh and Ors.

Sajid Langa Vs Fatama Bano and Anr.