Court No. - 33
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6354 of 2018 Petitioner :- Brijesh And 2 Others Respondent :- Anita Verma And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Saxena,Bharat Singh
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.
The petitioners have filed claim petition i.e. MAC No. 236 of 2014, which is pending before the MACT, Meerut. In the said claim petition, the opposite party (the Insurance Company) submitted a report. The said report was apparently based on investigation carried out by some officials of the insurance company. Upon filing of the said report, an application 46Ga-2 was filed by the claimant-petitioner stating therein that the persons from whom information was elicited, which forms basis of the report submitted by the investigator, have denied having made those statements, therefore those witnesses be summoned. The court below rejected the application by impugned order dated 14.03.2018 by observing that as and when the investigator is produced in evidence, the claimant- petitioner would have right to cross-examine the investigator.
It is well settled that a statement made in a report, on the basis of a statement of some other person, would be hearsay material therefore it would not be admissible in evidence. As to what value the report would carry would depend on the statement of the investigator. Hence, the court below has preserved the right of the claimant-petitioner to cross-examine the investigator when he appears as a witness.
Under the circumstances, no prejudice has been caused to the petitioners by rejection of the application 46Ga It is expected that the court would consider the value of the report, in light of the provisions of the Evidence Act, while deciding the matter.
With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed off. Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Pkb/