"lv>r c^XA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ,.rc.,r^r i^?'^ n ^ r^i ^ ^ ^^m asog M.A. rciNo. of 2009 APPELLANT ^ ^. ^ -^•.•i;;.., ....^•^.^' •;^^^" ^ Tribhuwan Ram Verma, S/o. Trilochan Singh Verma, aged about 42 years, R/o. Ghoghe Dabri, P.S. Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) at present resident of R.I. Division, Head Office Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Ganpat Ram Kanwar, S/o. ; Itwari Kanwar; aged abut 46 years, r/o. Village Urai, Dabri, 10- L^^ .?^^ P.S. Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon. DRIVER 2. Dinesh Kumar Ranglany, S/o. Arjun Das Ranglany; aged about A< 33 years, residenf of^ Police' '- Station Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) OWNER 3. Branch Manager, New India Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.). [. ^ MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL FCLAIM1 U/S 173 MOTOR VEHICLEACT 1988. N:'\' HI©HCOURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUDDUSI & HON'BLE MR.6ULAM MINHAJUDDIN. JJ Appellant Respondents M.A. [Cl No. 151/2009 Tribhuwan Ram Verma Vs Sanpat Ram Kanwar & others Present: Mr. R.N. Jha, Advocate for the appelldnt None for 1+ie respondents No.l ds 2 though served. Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate for the respondent No.3. ORDER (Oral) (Z6th August, 2011) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2. The appellant-injured claimant has filed this miscelbneous appeal against the aword dated 22,12.2008 passed by the learned Additional AAotor Accident CJaims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon (for short 'the Claims TribunaO in Claim Case No.10/08. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 19.05.2002 the injured claimant, who is posted as Revenue Inspector in the State ^overnment, was returning to his Village (yhoghedabri on his motorcycte bearing registration number CGOQ-A-2719. On the way, near Village Bijnapur, motorcycle of the cbimant was dashed by the vehicle bearing registration number MKft- 1023, which was being driven in rash and negligent manner by its driver, as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries and became unconscious. He was admitted in the Primary Health Centre, Dongargarh from where he was referred to Sector-9 Hospital, Bhitoi where he was treated up to 31.5.2002. Thereafter, the appellcuit got himself treated in the CIMS Hospital, Nagpur also. On account of permanent disability sustained by 1+ie injured-claimant in the sbyd accident, he had filed a claim application seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.12,25,000/- on the ground that due to permanent disablement, he has sustained loss of earning capacity. v < Fl-i'^-^-—^-' ^Hi.. -i^r: .?y""""".._ i X/ •'^:,;,;^^' 4. The Claims Tribunal vide impugned award dismissed the claim flipplication of the claimant on the ground that the ctaimant failed to prove his claim. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, We have also perused the records of the Claims Tribunal, 6. Perusal of the record shows that on 20,5.2002 itself 1+ie appellant has informed the potice regarding his accident with unknown vehicle. ftecord also revealed that due to the injuries sustained by the appellant, he was admitted in the hospital on 20.5.2002 and discharged on 4.6.2002. He had also filed documents regarding purchase of medicines etc. and treatment received by him- However, the Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim of the appellant on the ground that proper owner of the vehicle was not impleaded as party. 7. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides that on receipt of an application for compensation, the Claims Tribunal shall hold an inquiry into the cjaim. Section 169 of the Act, 1988 prescribes procedure and powers of the Claims Tribunal and says that in holding any inquiry under Section 168, the Claims Tribunal may, subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, follow such summary procedure as it thinks fit. The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing the attendance of witnesses and of compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as mcy be prescribed and the Claims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Cr.P.C. Besides this, in ftule 226 of the Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994 aiso it has been provided that the Clalms Tribunal shall conduct enquiry to ascertain the fact. 8. In the matter of Rajkumar Vs. Ajay Kumar <& flnother reported in 2010 (12) SCALE the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "......^e Tribunaf shoufd not be a sifent spectator when medical eyidence f^ tendered in regard ta the injuries and iiieir effecf in parficular the extent of permanent di^ability. Sections 168 and 169 of Ihe Act make it evident that the Tribunal does not function as a neutral umpire as in a civif suit, but as an n^—.-.— ^;^^ 1 ^. "y...^ ^'^Safi^^ active explorer and seeker of truth who is reguired ta fsaldan enquiry into ifse claim' for determining iiie 'just compen^thn'. The Tribunal should therefore take an active role to ascertain 1he true and correct position so 1fiat it can assess the 'just compensation.....^9 9- Thus, if the Claims Tribunal was of the view that real owner of the vehicle was some other person, then it was bounden duty of the Claims Tribunal to conduct an enquiry, as provided under Sections i68 & 169 of the Act, 1988 and Rule 226 of the Motor Vehicle Rules, to find out real owner of the vehicle involved in the accident, but it appears that 1+ie Claims Tribunal has treated the claim application as if the same was a civil suit. Therefore, we feel that the matter requires reconsideration at the end of the Claims Tribunal. 10.In the resuit, the appeal is partly allowed, impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Claims Tribunal for decision afresh in iight of the observations made in this order. Needless to mention that the Claims Tribunal shall provide opportunity to the parties to adduce further evidence/ if any, or to recall the witnesses, amend the pleadings or to file documents or verify the documents already filed and then decide the claim petition after conducting necessary enquiry as provided under Sections 168 <& 169 of the Act, 1988 and Rules 226 of the Motor Vehicles Rules. The parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal concerned on 29th September. 2011. 11. The Registry is directed to transmit record of the Claims Tribunal concerned without further delay. No order as to costs._^ Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Roshan/- Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge l-K!fw""- •-,:. AisSi»w£3?^:5<«.a^itaM'^