MAC.APP. 542/2008 Page 1 of 3 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP.542/2008 % Date of decision: 29th July, 2009 NIRMAL KATYAL & ORS ..... Appellants Through : Mr. V.P. Choudhary, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Nitinjya Choudhary and Ms. Sushma, Advs. versus AMARJEET SINGH & ANR ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Vikrant Sharma, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. for R – 2. CORAM :- THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may Yes be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be Yes reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. The appellants have challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.3,58,334/- has been awarded to the appellants under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. The accident dated 27th February, 2007 resulted in the death of Vijay Katyal. The deceased was survived by his wife, two sons, one daughter and parents, who filed the claimed petition before the Tribunal. MAC.APP. 542/2008 Page 2 of 3 3. The learned Tribunal has given a finding that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. The learned Tribunal has converted the claim petition from Section 166 to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act and has awarded the compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant challenges the finding of the learned Tribunal that there was no negligence on the part of the offending vehicle. It is further submitted that the learned Tribunal ought to have conducted an inquiry under Sections 168 and 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant also challenges the conversion of petition from Section 166 to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 5. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicle Act casts a duty on the learned Tribunal to conduct an inquiry. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act empowers the learned Tribunal to adopt such procedure as deemed fit for conducting an inquiry. However, record of the learned Tribunal reveals that the learned Tribunal has not conducted any inquiry as contemplated under the Act and there is error apparent on the face of the record. 6. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that the case may be remanded back to the Tribunal for conducting proper inquiry under Sections 168 and 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act in accordance with law. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 has no objection to the remanding back of the case to the learned Tribunal. MAC.APP. 542/2008 Page 3 of 3 7. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The impugned award is set aside and the case is remanded back to the Learned Tribunal for conducting a proper inquiry under Sections 168 and 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act and to pass a fresh award. Respondent no.2 has paid the entire award amount along with interest to the claimants, who shall retain the same and the said amount shall be adjusted against the final award. 8. The parties are directed to appear before learned Tribunal on 19th August, 2009. The trial court record shall be returned back through special messenger. 9. Copy of this order be given dasti to learned counsel for the parties under the signatures of the Court Master. J.R. MIDHA, J JULY 29, 2009 HL