F JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR C.G.l IN THE HIGH COURT O \ogo ETITION (227\ Nora WRIT P PETITIONER Ravindra Kumar Agrawal S/o Sri um“ ”PM M'L/Oww K.K.Agrawal Aged—about 32 years, R/o Adarsh Nagar Bhilai, Distt.- Durg [C.G.] Haal Mukam T.P.Nagar, Korba, Vijaya Takies Road, Korba, Distt.—Korba [G.] RESPONDENTS 1.Sri Shyam Sundar Thakur S/o le v C'W‘w‘k ¢ , V Sri Mahadev sngh Thakur, aged-50 years, caste- Rajput, R/o near Aramsheen water tank, CSEB, Korba, Distt.~ Korba [C.G.] ”f x @Vvo 2. Smt. Durga Bai Thakur W/o Sri Shyam Sundar Thakur aged—46 years, caste; Rajput, R/o near Aramsheen water tank, CSEB, Korba, Distt.— Korba [C.G.] . Monu Sahu S/o Sri Radhe Sao aged- about 2O years, R/o Seepat, Navadih, Thana— Seepat, Disttm Bilaspur [C.G.] WW Awww,3" / 4. National Insurance company limited Branch manager, National Insurance company limited, 13 Minu complex, main road, Kosabadi, Korba, Distt.— Korba[C.G.] ‘h" WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTIONS submit as under: yQQ/ The above named petitioner most humbly and respectfully begs to /20ll /' C. VERSUS , at i ~ 3 HIGH COURT OF CI-EIATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (227) No. 2 106 of 201 1 PETITIONER Ravindra Kumar Agrawal VERSUS Shri Shyam Sundar Thakur 6s others RESPONDENTS WRIT PETI'I‘ION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF‘ INDIA] (SB: Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Agarwal, J.) ¥ Present :Shri Anil Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner. " ORAL ORDER (Paswd on 21.04.2011) Heard on admission. The instant petition, tiled under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, calls in question the legality and propriety of order dated 15.03.2011, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba (for short ‘the 'I‘Iibunal’) in CT No. 44/09, whereby and whereunder the petitioner’s application for examination of R'I‘O person Bilaspur as their witness has been rejected. Brief facts of the case according to the appellant are that, I the claimants preferred an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’) seeking compensation for the death of deceased in an motor accident occurred on 08.03.2009. 4. Respondent/insurance company, to prove its defence, examined R’I‘O person Ranchi as its witness to show licence of the driver was fake and forged. ( 5‘ According to petitioner, the said licence was renewed by the RTO, Bilaspur, and to prove its renewal, prayer was made by the petitioner for examination of RTO person Bilaspur as their witness and the same has been dismissed by the trial court commenting on the merits of the matter. 6. Having heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner and having perused the order impugned, in the considered opinion of this court, since the matter is already fixed for petitioner’s evidence, the trial court ought to have aii‘orded an opportunity to the petitioner to examine R'I‘O person Bilaspur as their Witness to prove renewal of said driving licence. The merits of the matter has to be considered by the trial court at the time of passing of award/judgment. 7. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 15.03.2011 is set aside. The trial court is directed to afford opportunity to the petitioner to examine R'I‘O person Bilaspur as their witness tn prove renewal of said driving licence. No order as to costs. Since this petition is heard in the absence of respondents, they are free to move with an appropriate application, if Sd/— N.K. Agrawal Judge aggieved. Sahu