g. IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISC. APPEAL (Q No. c\ /2011. ?Isl< ;S! APPELLANT CLAIMANT t^^-C ^../^"^-'' ••••''.i4,'=>' ^'\^ a®-' ••'•' "^y^ 'o^" RESPONDENTS Shiv Ram, S/o. Shri Channu, aged about 35 years, R/o. Village Surokhi, P. S. Geedam, Tahsil and Disfa-ict Soyth Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) VER S U S Chhabi Lal, S/o. Shikari Ram Dhankar, aged about 40 years, R/o. Village Garh-pichwari, District North Bastar Kanker, (C.G.) at presently Dokrighat Para, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) (Driver of Vehicle No. M.P.04-0588) 2. '' Chhattisgarh State Infrastructure Development Corporation, Through : Incharge Collector, Dantewada, District South Bastar Dantewada (Chhattisgarh) (Owner ofVehicle N6. M.P.04-0588) ^••^, APPBAL U/sfl73 OF THB MOTOR VEHICLB ACT 1988 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M^_A, _[C1 No,_61of20U Appellant Shiv Ram Versus Respondents Chhabi Lal & another APPEAL UNDER SECTK5N_173_ OFL'LHE_MOTQR^EHICLES_ACT^1988 DB: HonTsle Shri Justice I. M. Quddusi 8s Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ Shri Paras Mani Shrivas,Advocate for the appellant/claimant. Shri Vinay-Harit, Deputy Advocate General for the State. ORDER (Oral) ( Passed on this 19tfa day ofJanuary, 2011 ) Per I. M. Quddusi, J. Heard. 1. This appeal arises from the impugned award dated 6th December, 2010, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribuinal, Dantewada in Claim Case No. 66/2009, dismissin^ the claim petition filed by the appellant. 2. The, brief facts, in nutshell, are that on 18.9.2002 at about 10.00 a.m. appellant/claimant Shivram was going on his cycle to Geedam. At that time the bus, bearing registration No. M.P. 04/0588, being driven in a rash and negligent inanner by the non-applicant No.l (Chabilal), hit the cycle. As a result of the accident Shivram received grievous injuries and got fracture in bone of a leg. Thus the injurecffiled a claim case for award of a compensation ofRs. 8,75,870/-. 3. Learned Claims Tribunal having .regard to the facts situation and the evidence on record dismissed the claim petition holding that it is not proved that the alleged accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the non-applicant No. 1 by the vehicle—M.P.04-0588. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the impugned award. The appellant/claimant has impleaded the Chhattisgarh State Infrastructure Developinent Corporation as non-applicant No.2. The accident had taken place by the Bus - MP 04 - 0588. After reorganization of the State of Madhya Pradesh liabilities and some assets were transferred to the Chhattisgarh State Infrastructure Development Corporation. The Tribunal has opined that it is not known as to by which bus the accident had occurred and to whom said bus belong. This opinion of the Tribunal is not sustainable in view of fhe fact that it was the duty of the non-applicant No.2 to come forward before the Tribunal statin; specifically that the bus did not belong to it. However, if the Tribunal was of the opinion, on the basis of the averments, that the offending Bus did not belong to the non-applicant No.2, an opportunity should have been given to the claimant to implead the Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation with its proper nomenclature. The Tribunal has also given Ending that when the bus hit the cycle from behind itwas not possible for the claimant to see the number of the Bus, which is also beyond improbability. After falling down from the cycle , in the absence of any cross-exan-iination in this regard,it cannot be said that it was not possible for the claimant to see the number of the bus. Further, the Tribunal has created a doubt that after 8 years the claimant had given the correct date of the accident and therefore that was beyond the probabilities. We do not agree with this opinion of the Tribunal because if the aceident had taken place and the elaimant comes to the Court to give evidence he could very well revive his memory before giving his evidence and as such the date of accident could be given in his statement by him and there would'have been no question of creating any doubt about the same. 6. Besides the above it was the duty of the Tribunal to conduct a proper enquiry and issue nodce to the proper parties in view of the provisions of Secdon 166 (4) and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 226 of the M.P./C.G. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994, which read as under : 166. Application for compensation. (4) The claims Tribunal shall treat any report of accidents forwarded to it under sub-section (6) of section 158 as an application for compensation under this Act. 168. Award ofthe Claiins Tribunal. (1) On receipt of an application. for compensadon made under section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after giving fhe parties (including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be, each of the claims and, subject to the provisions of section 162 may make an award determining the ainount of compensation which appears to it to be just and specifying the person or persons to whoin corapensation shall be paid and in making the award the Claims Tribunal shall specify the aniount which^shall be paid by the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle invblved in the accident or by all or any of thein.as the case niay be: Provided that where such application makes a claim for coinpensation under section 140 in respect of the death or permanent disablenaent of any person, such claim and any other claiin (whether niade in such application or otherwise) for 7. 8. compensation in respect of such death or permanent disablement shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter X. (2) The Claims Tribunal shall arrange to deliver copies of the award to the parties concerned expeditiously and in any case within a period offifteen days from the date ofthe award. (3) When an award is made under this section, the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such stward shall, within tbirty days of the date of announcing the award by the Claims Tribunal, deposit the endre amount awarded in such manner as the Claims Tribunal may direct. ~»\ Rule 226 ofthe Rules, 1994 reads as under : 226. Obtaining of information and docuinents necessary for awarding compensation under section 40. - The Claims Tribunal shall obtain whatever information and documents which may be found necessary from the police, medical and other authorities and proceed to award the claim whether the parties who were given notice, appear or not, on the appointed date. With regard to the registration number of the bus which was involved in the accident, according to the police report the number was MP 04- H 8588 and in the application it has been mentioned that MP 04 0588. That may be a typing mistake. However", the Tribunal has not given any finding that the accident had not taken place by the bus in question. Therefore it was a matter of enquiry to be conducted by the Tribunal. In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, we are of fhe opinion that fhe matter requires reconsideration by the Tribunal. Therefore, we think it proper that the matter should be reconsidered by the Tribunal and give its findings afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove. ^?^ <^ .^S^, 9. For the reasons stated herein above, we dispose of this appeal setting aside the impugned award dated 6.12.2010 and remit back the matter to the Tribunal for decision afresh in the light of the .observations made in the body of this order. 10. The Tribunal shall provide opportunity to the parties to amend their pleadings, implead party, adduce further evidence again in support of their pleadings and may file further documents and get the documents verified etc. Thereafter, fhe decision shall be made by the'Tribunal, as early as possible. 11. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs. ^/——/ \ 'Sdi-^s" ^tasV»ant^ASe ^-^' Thakur