KAMLESH DIXIT Vs. DHANIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Prabhat Trivedi, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

(2.) The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 26.03.2004 passed by the M.A.C.T./A.D.J., Court No.5, Hardoi in M.A.C.P. No.67/2002, wherein a sum of Rs.50,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal along with 9% interest from the date of the application till the date of its actual payment.

(3.) The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal has erred in carving out a new case inasmuch as while deciding the issue No.3 it has not given any clear finding as to whether the vehicle in question was insured rather it has gone on the premise that the insurance itself has been obtained by fraud. It has further been submitted that since the issue No.3 related to the fact that whether the vehicle was insured or not, the same was not decided, accordingly, in view of the Order XX Rule 5 CPC, the finding given by the Tribunal is erroneous as the issue framed on the point of insurance of vehicle has not been decided.