iKI IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTtSISARH AT BILASPUR z-z-Z WRIT PETITTON (Q-N0. a6-,5'2. /2008 PETETCONER Subhash Kumar Mishra, Aged about 48 years, S/o. Late Shri Ramnarayan Mishra, R/o. Old Sarkanda, Bagicha- para, Bilaspur, Tahsil <& District Bilaspur (C.6.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS %&. ^M ^y 1) Shri &.C. Gaba, Aged about 48 years, S/o. 'Shri Tallaram 6aba, R/o. Village Lukera, Tahsil Sangariya, District Hanumanganj, Rajasthan. 2) Surubachan Singh, Aged about 30 years, S/o. Sadhu Singh Jat, R/o. Village Budasan, Tahsil Kadi, District Mehsana (Sujrat) Both presently resident of Arya Colony, Tifra, Through Shri Dalvej Singh, Aged about 60 years, S/o. Harvansh Singh, R/o. Qtr. No. 26, Arya Colony, Tifra, Tahsil <& bistrict Bilaspur (C.(5.). 3) balvej Singh © 6yaniji, S/o. Harvansh Singh, R/o. Qtr. No. 26, Arya Colony, Tifra, Tahsil <& bistrict Bilaspur (C.6.). 4) National Insurance Company, D.0. 3 Kwis Road, Amritsar (Panjab) Through-Branch AAanager, National Insurance Company, Taha Complex, Priyadarsani Nagar, Bilaspur (C.6.) Bl li WRIT PFTETION UNbER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ifi-W. aii^iw R'lto "(WT <Hl3t?l ^*1 'TSI 'ttwiv^, &-^w\e, fsicii'yy ^,s^.fci2..25lS:..^.^ ^ *11*1<11 fl»*<l*»» T" <11^U sn^r'^^ (iqt3<i"t?) c^Sfliw, ttf^g 'ini^l (Single Bench: Hon'hleMr. N.K. Aaarwal, J.) '•. Shri Auand Kumar Tiwari, ^dvocate for the petitioner. Shri Gautam Khetrapal, Ad^ Leamed counsel appearini With the consent ofthe part' The instant petition is dl 20.02.2008, passed by the Ad^itional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Bilaspur. wherebv the ^ Order 6 Rule .17 ofCPC, has been Learned counsel appearing •<>wid<il-f iiiiA" ii ft^t (RK^K ^aifgnan^t 'ocate for the respondentNo. 4. for the parties present, submits that the respondent No. 1 to 3 i|vere remained exparte before the claims Tribunal and the main co4test is beUveen the petitioner and the respondent No. 4/Insurance C^mpany. es, the matter is heard finally. rected against the order dated etitioner's aDplication filed under dismissed. for the petitioner submits that the application for amendment m c]aim petition was moved by the claimant to elaborate the plea, alt-eady taken regarding damage of vehicle in the said accident, wl^ch is necessar>' to establish the .quantum of damage suffered 'by |the claimant. But the trial court rejected the application only 0^1 the ground of its refiisal to application for taking document oi^ record, filed by the claimant. He further submits that amendment 1s necessarv to elaborate the nlea regarding quantum ofdamage sujffered by the claimant a.nd in the interest ofiustice it ouehtto liave theen a11owed bv the_trifcuna.l . . _ n .ri&T^'IliSi"llriX<M-(i<;'li<<—FS/95—11 /2008—1,00,000. ||^ted:tf7^/^ V/ ^ss ^raropr, 's^yss, wwvy. I. sni^-qiWC^^?) •^rateqh•qn^!'S feszt "rfSrezre ^•srRraan^i Per contra, Shri Gautam Khetr^pal, couasel for the respondent ]STo. 4/Insurance Company, suppoijted the erder passed by the ITribunal. Afier hearing both the parties, |mpugned order, I am ofthe opinion having perused the record and ^hat this petition deserves to be ^illowed because the amendment ^ught for is well before the <tommencement of trial in the case a! Tribunal in assessing the iust coml iction 168 ofMotor Vehicles Act, 1$88. The petition is accordiugly P.02.2008, passsd by the Additi<| fribunal, Bilaspur, is hereby set aside| It is directed that tiie Tribuns licorporate the aforesaid amendmeni rjext date ofhearing, as has already yiowed aHd the order dated s|iall allow the respondent No. 4,/Insiirance Compan;' to amend its ad secondly, it would help the oensation a;s envisaged undi •na3 Motor Accident U shall allow the claimant to in the claim petitioa, on the jeen fixed by the Tribunal. and pjleading, if so desired, and thereafter; I'ith law. Certified copy as per rules. Sahu Sd/- N-K.Agrawal Judge ^^•^r?'^^^?T"Rt;?r^'—E-'S/9S—-i1/2GQ8—^,00-000.