SUJABA VESHALJI JADEJA Vs. SHAMJI JAKHRA BATTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Nishit A. Bhalodi, learned advocate for the petitioners states that the matter involves the legal issue, of claim over the compensation amount in terms of the award drawn in the Lok Adalat and hence, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) Mr. Bhalodi states that the prayer is made by the petitioners to quash and set aside the order dtd. 24/10/2019 passed by the MACT at Bhuj in Misc. Civil Review Application no.5 of 2015, which came to be dismissed, wherein the petitioners had made the prayer for review of the order and the award passed on 15/12/2013 in MACP no.36 of 2011 which was settled in the Lok Adalat, wherein the award amount was granted to the respective claimants as per the purshis.

(3.) Mr. Bhalodi submits that prior to the Review Application, Civil Misc. Application no.19 of 2014 was moved before the Tribunal making a prayer to grant the amount which was coming in the share of the deceased-Veshalji Meghrajji Jadeja to Sujaba Veshalji Jadeja - widow of the deceased and necessary affidavit was filed by the petitioner no.2 to grant the amount in the name of the petitioner no.1 - mother of the deceased and wife of the original claimant no.1. The application came to be rejected. It was urged before the Tribunal that the MACP was moved on the death of the Khetubha Veshalji Jadeja and MACP no.36 of 2011 was settled in the Lok Adalat with the insurance Company and in accordance with the settlement, Rs.4,25,000.00 was deposited in the Tribunal. It was urged before the Court that father of the deceased - original claimant no.1, during the pendency of the matter, died on 12/9/2011, but because of some inadvertence and ignorance, the name could not be deleted from the cause title and it was stated that the amount which comes to the share of the deceased be granted to the widow. The learned Tribunal has observed the fact of settlement in the Lok Adalat, however, it was also observed that the said settlement purshis did not bear the signature of any of the petitioners. The death certificate shows the death of Vesalji Meghrajji Jadeja on 12/9/2011. Compromise was recorded on 15/12/2013. As per the observation, the original claim petition was instituted on 21/1/2011. The affidavit of the claimant no.3 was produced on record on 15/10/2011 and she was cross-examined on 20/6/2013. The matter was settled on 7/12/2013 while the death was prior to the settlement and therefore, the learned Tribunal observed that Veshalji Meghrajji Jadeja died on 12/9/2011. The claim petition qua him would stand abated as per Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC"). The learned Tribunal has also referred to Order XXII Rule 10A of the CPC, which relates to the duty of pleader to communicate to Court, death of a party and therefore, observed that the settlement, which was made on 7/12/2013, was without any authority and would not be considered as legal as per the provision of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC and thus, lays down that any award on that basis is a nullity and therefore, the application of the claimant as heir of the deceased for granting the share came to be rejected.