IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA FAO No. 464 of 2007 alongwith FAO No. 509 of 2007 and Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. Date of Decision: 30.8.2011. FAO No. 464 of 2007. State of HP & Anr. ….Appellant. Versus. Tilak Ran & Ors. …Respondents. FAO No. 509 of 2007. Tilak Raj ….Appellant. Versus. State of HP & Ors. …Respondents. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. Tilak Raj ….Petitioner. Versus. Devi Ram & Ors. …Respondents. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? No. For the Appellants: Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl. AG with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. AG for the appellants in FAO No. 464 of 2007 and for respondents No. 1 & 2 in FAO No. 509 of 2007 and for respondents No. 3 & 4 in Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. For the Respondents: Mr. H.C. Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1 in FAO No. 464 of 2007 and for appellant in FAO No. 509 of 2007 and for petitioner in Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2 in FAO No. 464 of 2007 and for respondent No.3 in FAO No. 509 of 2007 2 and for respondent No.2 in Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. Mr. Tarlok Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.3 in FAO No. 464 of 2007 and for respondent No.4 in FAO No. 509 of 2007 and for respondent No.1 in Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. All the aforesaid cases being FAO Nos. 464 & 509 of 2007 and Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011 are being disposed of by a common judgment, since they arise out of the same proceedings. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Shri Tilak Raj filed a claim petition before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Mandi, Camp at Karsog claiming that he had suffered injuries in an accident involving truck bearing registration No. HP-30-2251 owned by Sh. Devi Ram and truck bearing registration No. HP-30-0583 belonged to the State of Himachal Pradesh. In this claim petition, respondent No.4- Devi Ram was proceeded against ex parte and the claim petition was decided on 13.7.2007 whereby the drivers of both the vehicles were held guilty of contributory negligence and consequently the State of HP, as well as Sh. Devi Ram was held liable to pay 50% out of the awarded amount. 3. Aggrieved by this award, the State of HP filed FAO No. 464 of 2007. Shri Tilak Raj filed FAO No. 509 of 2007 claiming enhancement of the compensation. 4. In the meanwhile, Shri Devi Ram filed an application before the learned Tribunal praying that the ex-parte award passed against him be set aside, since he had been wrongly proceeded against ex-parte. This 3 application was allowed by the learned Tribunal and aggrieved by the said order, the claimant-Tilak Raj has filed civil revision No. 107 of 2011. It is, therefore, first essential to decide Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. Civil Revision No. 107 of 2011. 5. From the documents placed on record, it is apparent that Shri Devi Ram was served in the proceedings before the learned Tribunal and was directed to appear before the learned Tribunal at Karsog on 9.12.2004. It appears that no Circuit Court of the MACT, Mandi at Karsog was held on the said date as there are no proceedings of the said date. The file was thereafter taken up on 6.1.2005 and it was ordered that since Shri Devi Ram was not present despite service he was proceeded against ex-parte. It may be true that Sh. Devi Ram had been served but he had been served to appear on 9.12.2004, on which date no Court proceedings took place. There is nothing on record to indicate that there was a general order or notice placed on the Notice Board directing that all the matters would be taken up for effective hearing on 6.1.2005. A litigant would legitimately expect that he would be summoned again. Therefore, the learned Tribunal was absolutely justified in recalling the order whereby Sh. Devi Ram was proceeded against ex-parte. Therefore, I find no merit in the civil revision which is accordingly dismissed. FAO Nos. 464 of 2007 & 509 of 2007. 6. In view of the fact that the award of the learned Tribunal has been recalled and Shri Devi Ram has been allowed to cross-examine the witnesses, the evidence shall have to be recorded again. It is, therefore, obvious that both the appeals have become infructuous. 4 7. In view of the above discussion, the civil revision is dismissed on merits and the appeals are dismissed as infructuous. In view of the fact that the accident took place in the year 1999, the learned Tribunal is directed to dispose of the petition at the earliest and in any event not later than 31.3.2012. The parties through their learned counsel are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 28th September, 2011. Shri Devi Ram must file his written statement to the petition on or before the said date. The Registry is directed to send back the record of the learned Tribunal below, so as to reach well before the date fixed. No costs. (Deepak Gupta), Judge 30th August, 2011. (Krn Guleria)