IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT^lLASPUR M.A. fC) No.'^C'T' / 2008 ">- APPELLANT: Non-Applicant No. 1 1 ^i'j.^ ;^ii ^^ ^:"sfn;^u^ 1'^ ^ y &'^ifti ^^'iiit^'tl -'Ashok Kumar Jain (Malu) S/o Shri Pannalal Jain (Malu), 31 ^<qt5 R/o Village Tongpal, P.S. Tongpal Distt. South Bastar (Dantewada) VERSUS Smt. Midiyami Ayate, W/o late Midiyami Joga, 28 years, Ku. Midiyami Tulsi D/o late Midiyami Joga, 3 years through mother in natural guardian N.A. No. 1 Midiyami Ayate Both R/o Vill. Leda, P.S. Tongpal, TahsU Konta, Distt. South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) Maniram Dhurwa, S/o Somaru Dhurwa, R/o Vill. Tongpal, P.S. Tongpal,Teh. Konta,pistt. South Bastar (C.G.) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/S 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 8_ RESPONDENTS ,<;LAIMANTS ^-^ -^w ">.' Non-applicant No. 2 3. HIOH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILA8PUR DB: HON'BLB I.M. QUDDUSI & PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ, M. A(C| No. 307 OF 2008 Vs. MISC. APPEALS U/S 173 OP THB MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 1988 APPEARANCE: Mr, PrafuU Bharat, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Subhash Yadav, counsel fbr fhe respondents. ^; ORDBR (ORALI (08.12.2010) Per I.M. QUDDUSI, A 1. This appeal Iias been fUed by ttie owaer of the vetucle ia question clialleii^ing fhe award dated 24.12.2W7 passed by fhe Addl. Motor Accident Clauns Tribunal, Dantewada, South Bastar (C.G) in Claim Case No.49/2005 awardmg Rs.4,10,600/- to the claimants. 2. Brieffacts ofthe case as per the veision ofthc claimaats are that froin vSlaffs Leda, the deceased Midiyami Joga teft for TemurpaU by Truck bearmg Regn. No. C.G. 18-ZB/0162 to work fhere as Labour/HamaU. On 21.02.2003 after coinpletuig the Hamali works, he was sleeping under a tree uear the said Truck which was at a stationaiy condition. At that tune, respondent no.S/Driver Matiiram Dhurwa wifhout giviag any hom saad wifhout lookiag to the surroundiag position started the Truck at once aud ran it over the •I. .i": ^.'^SS^S^^BS APPELLANT Ashok Kumar Jain (Malu) RESPO(IDBNTS Smt Midiyami Ayate and ofhers '^ ^ISfe 1 t.,.-.,^ IS-ST.^ ^ ^ deceased ia a rash and negligent inanner, on account of wliich, fhe deceased has died on the spot due to fhe injuries susteiaed by Hm. The deceased was aged about 30 years haviug good heatth. He was eaming Rs.100/- per day by doing labour/Iiainali works. The claunaats beiug fhe legal heirs and dependents of fhe deceased have filed claun petition claiming to fhe tune of Rs.8,41,000/- on various heads. The learaed claiias Tnbiinal held that the respondent iio.3 was driving the vehicle in question rashly and negli^enfly and has caused the accident in which Madiyami Joga has died. The appeUaat did not appear before fhe Tribunal, therefore, the Tnbunal has proceeded ex-parte and passed the ex-parte order. Later on, aa appUcation was inoved for setting aside fhe ex-parte order on behalf of the appeUant aud vidc order dated 23.04.2007, ex-parte order was set aside aud the casc was fixed for further hearmg, but the appeUant did not niovc appUcation for recaUing of the witoesses aad thus, no cross examiaation of the previousty exanuned witaesses couM be done. However, CIauuant No. 1 who reinaiaed present on the dates along-wifh couusel had given her stateiuent again. Thus, on the basis ofevidence and further evidence recorded earlier, the award was passed and liabiMty was imposed upon the owner appellaat. One wltness of the claimaat namely Marvi Siikka (A.W.2) inade a stateinent on 10.07.2006 that he was also engaged as labour ia the veliicle ia question i.e., Truck No.C.G.18- 13 " ^^•^^S'&^SSSKB^i^SEBS^'^flltAiZ??' ~^--"—--.'•— Rao 6. ZB/0162 along-wifh fhe deceased. Both were working as Hanial. The owner of the truck was appeUaat Ashok Kumar Jain and the driver of fhe Truck was Mnnimm Dhurwa. He aad MadiaiDi Joga both were sleeping at fhat veiy time. AU of a sudden, Driver Maairain has started the truck aud proceeded on, due to which deceased died. The driver did uot give hom also. As he was fhe eye-wltness alongwith the other aUeged eye-witnesses but no cross examiaation was done because fhe appellant was exparte, which was later on set aside. We feel it proper that this wituesses Marvi Sulcka (A.W.2) should besumaioned by the Tribunal to eaable the appeUant to cross exainine him and for that piirpose, we have to set aside the impugned award and remit the utatter back to the Tribuaal for expeditious disposal a&esh. Therefore, we allow fhis appeal in part, set aside the iinpugaed award aad remit the matter to fhe Tribunal wbich shaU decide the claim petition a&esh after providiag due opporturuty to the appellant to cross examiae Marvi Sukka (A.W.2) as early as possible and preferably within 3 Hionfhs fiTOin the date ofreceipt ofthe Lower Court Records. The parties shall appear before fhe MACT conceraed on 1 1th Januanr, 2011. The records of the Tribiinal shall be sent back without further delay. The amount which is iu dcposit shatt reinam iu deposit tiU fresh award is inade. Sd/- I-M.Quddusi Judge Sdl- prashantKumarMishra Judge \: >C^E^':S^Wf^s^ •