1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ** S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.301/2000 (Madan Vs. Babulal) Date of Judgment : 06-08-2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Mr.K.N.Tiwari,for the appellants. Mr.D.K.Sharma, for the respondents. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of injured-appellant against the judgment & award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Raj. Cooperative Tribunal, Jaipur dated 14.12.99 whereby the claim petition of the appellant was dismissed on the ground that the accident took place on account of lapse at the part of injured and not on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle-jeep. 2. According to the facts of the case, accident took place on 4.6.94 at about 8.45 in the morning when the injured-appellant was crossing the road when he was dashed by jeep near Tent House at Vishwa Karma, Jaipur resulting into injury to the injured. The injured sustained fractures in febula and tibia bones of right leg and thereby sustained 18% disability. 2 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the evidence on issue no.1 pertaining to rash and negligent driving at the part of offending vehicle in right perspective. It is also submitted that injured was crossing the road when he was dashed by the vehicle on account of rash and negligent driving but the Tribunal has wrongly construed the deposition and has concluded that accident took place on account of suddenly crossing the road. It is also submitted that the offending vehicle has been challaned by the police after due investigation and that the injured who was cautiously crossing the road cannot be held responsible for the accident and it was the duty of the offending vehicle to ensure that he may not dash against the pedestrian who was crossing the road. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has not decided other issues pertaining to quantum of compensation, therefore, case deserves to be remanded to the Tribunal with an opportunity to adduce evidence as well as for fresh hearing. 3 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the Tribunal and submitted that the learned Tribunal has decided the issue of rash and negligent driving on the basis of evidence adduced during the enquiry and calls for no interference. 5. After hearing the rival contentions, and going through the award as also record of the case, it is revealed that accident took place at a time when the injured who was pedestrian, was crossing the road but it is not revealed that he suddenly crossed the road and, as such, the liability for the accident by the driver of the offending vehicle vis-a-vis a pedestrian is required to be adjudged in right perspective and appellant deserves to be given opportunity for advancing his argument to the Tribunal and leading evidence, if any. That apart all issues including the issue of quantum of compensation deserve to be decided and case deserves to be remanded. 6. Accordingly, impugned judgment & award dated 14.12.1999 passed by the Tribunal is 4 set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh decision on all the issues by the Tribunal after giving opportunity of hearing and adducing evidence, if any to both the parties. Both the parties shall remain present before the Tribunal on 3.9.09. Record be sent forthwith. The appeal stands disposed of. (GUMAN SINGH),J. Sandeep/- item no.31