1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgementt and award dated 14.10.2004 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kheda at Nadiad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 94 of 2003, wherein the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,54,000/ along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application.
2.0 The original claimants had filed application under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ( for short “the Act”) on account of death of Riteshkumar Pravinbhai Patel in a vehicular accident that occurred on 04.05.2003 at 11.00 p.m. The Tribunal has passed the aforesaid award in claim petition filed under Section 163A of the Act, which is challenged in this appeal.
3.0 Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that on account on large scale volunteer retirement scheme amongst the four Nationalized Insurance Scheme including the appellant, the senior officers had retired and few staff has been left at the office of the appellant. Under the circumstances, on account of pressure of work, though the in charge divisional officer received notice of the present compensation application from the learned Tribunal, same remained unattended all throughout till the office received notice of execution application from the learned Tribunal and it realized its mistake. Learned advocate for the apellant submitted that on account on bonafide mistake due to pressure of work, the notice of the present application remained attended and therefore, indulgence of this Court is required.
4.0 Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that exparte award is passed by the learned Tribunal without examining the matter on merits.
5.0 Learned advocate for the respondents supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal.
6.0 In the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sinitha and Others, reported in 2011(13) SCALE 85, it is held that it is open to the owner or insurance company, as the case may be, to defeat a claim under section 163A of the Act by pleading and establishing a 'fault' ground.
7.0 I have gone through the judgement of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has passed the judgement and award exparte. It appears that it is only because of the bonafide mistake the exparte order came to be passed. If the appellant is not afforded opportunity a nutritious case may not get its result and therefore, I am of the view that present case requires consideration.
8.0 In the premises aforesaid, the judgement and award impugned in the present appeal is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal to consider the same afresh. The Tribunal will consider the matter afresh after allowing the appellantInsurance Company to defend their case. The appellantInsurance Company will present this judgement and order before the learned Tribunal. The appellant shall file their written statement within a period of four weeks from today. The Tribunal shall hear and decide the matter as early as possible and in any case within a period of one year from the date of receipt of writ of this order. In the meanwhile the awarded amount shall be invested in a fixed deposit by the Tribunal with any nationalized bank in the name of the Nazir of the Tribunal and the receipt thereof shall be retained with the Tribunal. The interest that may be accrued on the said deposit shall not be disbursed. If ultimately the claimants succeed in the claim petition, the amount lying in FDR shall be paid to the claimants. In case, the claimants fail in the main claim petition, the said amount shall be withdrawn by the Insurance Company.
9.0 It is clarified that Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The Appeal stands disposed of.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*