ASHA RANI Vs. HARBHAJAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this F.A.O. the only question raised is whether the Tribunal was right in disallowing the appellants to lead additional evidence to establish the identity of the vehicle involved in the accident. In the claim petition it was stated that Vehicle No. DHL-4187 was involved in the accident causing the death of Virender Kumar Minocha. The respondents 1 and 2, namely, the Driver and the owner of the vehicle were proceeded ex parte. Respondent No. 3, the Insurance Company, alone filed the written statement. There are mechanical denials and after reading the written statement the impression left is that the denials are made for avoiding responsibility. After stating that the number of vehicle was not stated in the F.I.R. and further stating that the vehicle was not involved in the accident it is asserted on behalf of the respondent-company that the Driver of the vehicle did not have driving license and as such the Insurance Company was not liable. The counsel for the appellants states that non-mention of the names of the witnesses in the application for additional evidence may be due to the fact that the counsel did not apply his mind properly. He also submits that respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the vehicle can also be cited as witnesses. The Insurance Company has admitted that the vehicle mentioned in the petition was registered in the name of Shri Gurcharan Singh, Respondent No. 2. The Insurance Company was permitted to contest the proceedings on merits after the evidence of the appellants was closed. The denial of opportunity to lead additional evidence to the appellants, in these circumstances, is violative of the principles of natural justice. The accident took place in 1980. The deceased is survived by three minor daughters and a widow and they have been denied the compensation for the last six years. The appellants shall be entitled to examine such additional witnesses as they want to examine. The appellants shall take expeditious steps to complete their evidence without much delay. The appellants and the respondents shall appear before the Tribunal on 1-9-1986 for further proceedings.

(2.) FOR the reasons stated above the appeal is allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The original records be returned to the Tribunal immediately.