Hon'ble Mahendra Dayal,J.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
The appellants being aggrieved by the award dated 14.12.2007, passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/ 1st Additional District Judge, Room No.1, Lucknow, dismissing the claim petition, have preferred this First Appeal From Order.
The appellants filed a petition numbered as Claim No. 54/2002 with the averments that the deceased, namely, Santosh Kumar Singh was a Class-IV employee in D.V.D.T. Inter College, Unnao. His age was about 24 years and he was getting Rs. 2900/- per month as salary. Apart from this, he also used to earn Rs. 1000/-. The accident took place on 26.11.2001 when he was going to Unnao on his Motorcycle when he reached near Sonik Power House at about 8.00 P.M., the Driver of Jeep No. U.P. 32 G-4584 came at a very high speed and its driver negligently driving the jeep, collided with the Motorcycle, as a result of which he received serious injuries and died on 28.11.2001.
The respondents contested the claim and denied the factum of accident. It was pleaded that on the alleged date of accident, the jeep allegedly involved in the accident was at Orai and as such the question of causing any accident using the said jeep did not arise.
The learned Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings of the parties framed three issues and while deciding issue no.1, recorded a finding on the basis of evidence that the death of the deceased by the use of Jeep No. U.P. 32 G-4584 was not found proved. This finding was recorded by the learned Tribunal on the basis of the fact that the police, although registered a case of accident on the basis of the FIR but the appellants did not place on record any evidence to show as to what happened in the aforesaid case. The Tribunal also found that the appellants also did not prove as to whether the jeep involved in the accident was subjected to technical inspection and even the vehicle was not seized by the police. In these circumstances, the Tribunal found that the appellants had failed to prove that the accident took place by the use of Jeep No. U.P. 32 G-4584, which was said to be at Orai for two days and was not in Lucknow on the date of accident.
The appellants during the pendency of this appeal moved an application on 11.4.2008 for taking additional evidence on record. It was contended by the appellants that the police after registering the case on the basis of the FIR conducted investigation and also submitted charge sheet against the driver. The vehicle involved in the accident was also technically examined by the Head Constable Motor Technical and subsequently the vehicle was released by the orders of the Court. The driver was also released on bail on the basis of the order passed by the Court. All these documents could not be placed on record before the Tribunal and the same are sought to be filed in this appeal as additional evidence. As the aforesaid documentary evidence is important piece of evidence and the respondents have not filed any objection against the application for taking on record the additional evidence, we allow the application and admit the additional evidence filed by the appellants before this Court.
Since the additional evidence filed by the appellants was not before the Tribunal at the time of passing of the impugned award, we find it proper that the matter be remitted back to the Tribunal concerned for taking into account the additional evidence filed by the appellants before this Court and decide the claim petition afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
We accordingly, allow the appeal and set aside the impugned award dated 14.12.2007 and remit the matter back to the Tribunal concerned with the direction that the Tribunal shall decide the claim petition afresh after taking into account the additional evidence and also after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Since the claim petition relates to year 2002 we also direct the Tribunal concerned to make every endeavor to decide the claim at the earliest preferably within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the court below.
The office shall send the record of the claim petition, if received, to the Tribunal concerned along with the certified copy of this judgment within ten days.
Order Date :- 8.9.2014 Muk