1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ** S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.2081/2006 (Naveen Notiyal Vs. Kanhaiya Lal Gurjar and ors.) Date of Judgment : 04-05-2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Mr.Sandeep Mathur,for the appellants. Mr.R.S.Bhati & Mr. Praveen Jain, for the respondents. Both the parties agreed to for final disposal of this appeal at admission stage. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of appellant-claimant against the judgment/award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Addl. Distt. And Sessions Judge No.7, Jaipur city, Jaipur vide judgment dated 18.2.2006 whereby the claim petition of the appellant-claimant was dismissed on the basis of finding on issue no.1 wherein it was observed by the Tribunal that appellant-claimant has failed to establish that vehicle in which appellant was traveling was involved in the accident. 3. According to the facts of the facts, accident took place on 27.1.1998 and the 2 appellant-claimant was traveling in Jeep No.RJ-26C-0382 and was going towards Jaipur. The jeep was being driven by the respondent no.1 Kanhaiya Lal who was driving the jeep rashly and negligently. The jeep collided against the tractor which was not bearing any registration number. The police investigated the matter and ultimately found the liability at the part of the tractor but the tractor could not be traced out. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in this case, FIR was lodged by the driver of the jeep wherein he had mentioned that one person sitting in the jeep was injured and thus the involvement of the jeep and the appellant in the accident stands proved but the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the evidence in right perspective in giving finding that appellant claimant could not prove the involvement of the jeep. The learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim on this count alone. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the Tribunal and submitted that the learned 3 Tribunal has taken into consideration evidence adduced during inquiry and has awarded adequate compensation and calls for no interference. 6. After hearing the rival contentions, and going through the award as also record of the case, it is revealed that FIR was lodged by the driver of the jeep himself and he had also mentioned that one person sitting in the jeep was injured though he did not mention the name of the appellant in the FIR. That does not rule out the involvement of the jeep and the driver in the accident. The evidence has also been adduced that at the relevant time the injured was traveling in the jeep. IN this view of the matter, the case deserves to be remanded for fresh decision after appreciation of evidence in right perspective. 7. Accordingly, the impugned judgment/award dated 18.2.2006 passed by learned MACT-cum- Addl.Distt. & Sessions Judge No.7, Jaipur city, Jaipur is set aside. The matter is remanded back for fresh decision after 4 giving opportunity of hearing and leading evidence to both the parties. Both the parties are directed to remain present before the Tribunal on 25.5.09. Record of the case be sent forthwith to the Tribunal. (GUMAN SINGH),J. Sandeep/- item no.88