IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.0.1 WRIT PETITIONf227) N0. ^L|.<^ /2009SWGLE BENCH liSllit'Sl!;lia PETITIONERS Claunants M ^? ^w •^??' i,o~ -<('"' ^S'" /" w ^ ^s^ RESPONDENTS l.Smt. Rasida W/o late Safar Khan Aged-about 35 years, 2.3adaf Khan S/o Late Safar Khan, aged-about 12 years, -- 3-Shahnaj Khan D/o late Safar Khan, aged-about 09 years, (2 8s 3 are minors, through their mother Smt. Rasida W/o late Safar Khan, R/o behind naya ganj, near sindhi colony, Kharasiya, Distt.- Raigarh [C.G.] Haal inukam - vill^e - Salihabhatha, gram panchayat-Dhongdaraha, post- Nonbirra, via-bhiasama, tahsil-Kartala, Distt.-Korba [G.G.] Niyajnat khan S/o latc Raoul IChan, age4-about 78 ycars [dicd] i< <^ ^.Sajin Bee W/o Niyainat khan, aged- about 65 years All are the R/o village - SaUhabhatha, gram panchayat-Dhongdaraha, post- Nonbirra, via-bhiasama, tahsil-Kartala, Distt.- Korba [C.G.] ^ VERSUS l.Ram Babu S/o Ramchandra Yadav aged-about 28 years, R/o village- Surakachhar, infront of SECL gate, Thana- Bankunogara Tahsil- Katghora, Distfc- Korba [C.G.] 2. Sri Dheeraj Singh S/o Sri A.Singh R/o Main Road, r Baiikiinogara, Thana-Bankimogara Tahsil- Kalghora, Distt.- Korba [C.G.] 3. Branch inanager, Reliance General Insurance company liniited, Branch o£5ce-plot no. 09, transport nagar, inain rpad Korba, Tahsil SE Distt.- Korb^{C.G.] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT. ORDER OR DIREC'ITONS ^.< '—78 an^l ^[ ('(-li'* TiSff 3^I^T 9»Wf» Wldl «»*()<» ^afS!F^Pf,~^3Rff^, fadl'My —^£j(^±^o.~6(irZ.j 5fll^iFT1t3W ('rtp^) TOnwaftaaii^f ^Plfepftq •WRlf<f'fei^ TfW?K ^afimOTt^ ^^ S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Abarwa! 09-11-200a Shri Sanjay Patei, counsei or the petitieners. Heard on admission. Feeling aggrieved by the ^rders dated 15-07-2009 & 16-09- 2009 passed in Claim Case No Claims Tribunai, Korba, the instan) As per the petitioners, tl appfication under Order 7 Ru!e 14 document (income certificate of record. The teamed Tribuna! dismissed the application on the decision of the instanf claim pett review application and submitted 1199/2008 by the Motor Accident petition has been filed. |e petitioners/Claimants filed an (3) sub-rule (2) of C.P.C. for taldng the deceased Suflter Khan) on 'i'ide its order dated 15-07-20)9 ^round that the income certificate filed is of father of the deceas^d, it is not relevant for the just ion. The petitioners preferred a that in fact they have fiied the certificate of deceased himseif an^ not of his father and, therefore, the order requires review and the diocument so filed may be taken on record. Learned Tribunal vide (ts order dated 16-09-20C® also dismissed the review application h^nce this petition. After hearing Jearned courjsel for the petitioners and after perusal of the orders impugned, |n the consldered opinion of this Court the petition deserves to beia!iowed. When ciaimants have fiied document showing income| of the deceased, then sueh document is csrtainly a relevant Idocument inasmuch as upon Its ^'IB^.—1-U.J—I ? V^7^W^KW^9 :ft»'Wwyt^W-i^- l;ii|l!l —78 3D^f^[ R-li'* ^ansn^iwiN; Kvr T^^l'tl^'t4), ©TitwKo,fatiiuy . u P C^^ ^" ,64^ T(TOCtT^mW» o^ sn^r T?3EP( yiyt?) ^aiw^ifttfaniar ^2- cbse oitders proof it will have a bearing in the In view of the above, the directed that the learned tribunal and permit the petitioner to exanfine said document in accordance witji i.e. J2u'JM'gKemfe|f, 2009 and petitjpn expedftiQySly in accordanc^ If tt'ie othS' party aggrie'l appticatioh. thdn dillil'lll't t)m?ff 4 fe^T <Ifl«Srl<. ^sifOTiffl^r and, therefore, is relevant. impugned are set aside. It is ^hall take the document on record relevant witness to prove the law on the next date of haaring to proceed to decide the claim ^ with law on its own merits. jfed, may prefer an aj^iropriate I/ Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge >J..J.J.^i—-^:..i|i)!» "- ~^-"-->Kl»*'-.'(M?fslfl-viVffW'WSV-''1-!'