IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.70 of 2004 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. Versus NEELAM DEVI & ORS ----------- 13/ 30.09.2008 The order under challenge is dated 29.11.2003 and award signed on 20.1.2004, by 7th Additional District Judge-Cum-Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Bhagalpur, in Claim Case No. 67 of 1997, whereby and whereunder, the learned Tribunal has directed the appellant-United India Insurance Company Ltd. to pay compensation amount to the claimants. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and respondents. The only point which has been raised here, on behalf of the appellant, for assailing the judgment and award is non-framing of the issues and thereafter deciding the matter. It has been submitted that on the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal was required to frame issues and then it should have decided each issue separately. The learned counsel for the respondent has not been able to give any satisfactory reply. From the record, it appears that after filing of the claim case by Neelam Devi and others being legal heirs of the deceased Bijli Sah @ Bidur Sah, who died on account of an accident, owner of the vehicle Smt. Mira Devi appeared but did not file any written statement. She filed only rejoinder and gave details of insurance cover so as to fasten liability on the shoulder of the appellant-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. - 2 - Opposite party no. 3 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. appeared and filed its written statement and pleaded that claimants had no valid cause of action, petition for claim was not maintainable and also raised certain objections. In that context of the matter there should have been framing of issues and thereby determination of issues one by one. In the facts and circumstances, the order impugned is not sustainable on law as also on facts and, so, interference will be required. In the result, after setting aside the impugned order, the Tribunal is directed to frame issues and decide the matter in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to the respective parties of being heard and also to adduce evidence if they so like preferably within six months, from the date of communication of this order. With the aforesaid observations and direction, this Misc. Appeal is disposed of. Sanjeet (Subash Chandra Jha, J.)