- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- CIVIL MISC. APPEAL No. 184 of 1995 DARIYA SINGH V/S DARSHAN SINGH & ORS. Mr. RAJESH PANWAR, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. DR LUNKAR for Mr. RK MEHTA, Mr.NL JOSHI, for the respondent Date of Order : 21.1.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. ORDER ----- This is claimant's appeal, filed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhadra, dated 21.1.95, dismissing the claim of the appellant, for property damage i.e. damage caused to the jeep, by the delinquent truck. The facts of the case are that on 17.5.92 the delinquent truck No. DIG 4443 hit against the jeep of the appellant, resulting into death of one Vijay Singh also, for which case was registered. Inter-alia on these facts, two claims were filed, one by the legal representatives of Vijay Singh, and other by the owner of the jeep. The learned Tribunal decreed the claim for compensation for death of the deceased. However, so far as - 2 - the claim of the appellant is concerned, while deciding issue No.2, the learned Tribunal found, that the claimant has not produced the Registration Certificate, which might have shown, that the jeep belonged to him, and the defendants have not admitted the claimant to be owner of the jeep. Likewise, Sheeshpal has deposed to be himself treating Yakub to be the owner of the jeep. Thus, it was found, that the claimant has failed to prove the jeep to be belonging to him, and therefore, it did not go into the question of quantum of damages suffered, and the claim was dismissed. The appellant in the present appeal has filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, pleading inter- alia, that the appellant could not produce the Registration Certificate at the relevant time, because the Registration Certificate got misplaced by the claimant, and the same could not be produced before the Tribunal during trial, which he has found recently, and is being produced. Copy of this application was served on the counsel for the respondent long back, but no reply has been filed. I have perused the original Registration Certificate, and find, that at page 14 thereof, there is endorsement of transfer of the registration in name of present appellant, having been effected w.e.f. 27.4.92, and then the vehicle has further been transferred on 27.7. - 3 - probably 97. Be that as it may. The fact remains, that from this it is clear, that as on date of accident, which occurred on 17.5.92, the vehicle stood registered in the name of the appellant. In my view, since the genuineness of this certificate does not appear to be doubtful, and the contents thereof are very material for deciding the case correctly, at the same time, I am satisfied with the explanation given in the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, about the reason for the appellants disability to produce the certificate before the trial Court. Accordingly, the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC is allowed and the Registration Certificate produced by the appellant is taken on record. Since the Registration Certificate has been taken on record of this Court as above, and since the finding of the learned trial Court, in dismissing the claim, is based solely on the factum of non-production of Registration Certificate, and thereby the appellant having failed to prove to be the owner of the vehicle, so as to be entitled to claim compensation, and on that ground, the learned trial Court has declined to assess the quantum of compensation, in my view, the matter is required to be remanded back to the learned trial Court, holding the - 4 - appellant to be entitled to be awarded compensation as owner, and for the purpose of assessment of quantum of compensation. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award is set aside, and the appellant is held entitled to get compensation. However, since the quantum has not been assessed by the learned trial Court, the matter is remanded back to the learned trial Court, to assess the compensation, on the basis of material already available on record, and thereafter to decide the claim, in accordance with law. The record of the learned trial Court be returned forthwith, the original Registration Certificate as produced before this Court and taken on record be also transmitted to the learned trial Court, and the learned trial Court is directed to expeditiously decide the matter. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/