BUDHARU ROY Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Consequent upon the death of the petitioners' son Buiya Roy in a motor accident caused by the maxi taxi No. WGV 2556, a claim of compensation was lodged before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, 2nd Court, Jalpaiguri, which was numbered as MAC No. 285 of 1996. Pending final disposal of the claim there was also a petition filed for payment of compensation on the principle of no fault liability that is, under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

(2.) While considering the prayer as such the learned Tribunal by the impugned order dated 7.11.1997 asked the parties to adduce evidence with regard to their contentions in controversy. Suffice it to give extract of the impugned order which is as follows: Though I have not meticulously gone through the decisions of the hon'ble High Court and the Supreme Court cited on behalf of the applicants since they are not placed before me this day, but I am of the view that this argument can be heard at length at the time of hearing argument of the claim application and that the applicants would not be prejudiced in any way if the O.P.'s claim is allowed since the applicants would get opportunity to cross-examine the witness on that score. On the other hand, refusal of O.P.'s prayer may prejudice it.

(3.) On the very face of the impugned order, therefore, it appears that the Tribunal proposed to enter into the merits of the case, but the provisions with regard to no fault claim as contained under Section 140 of the aforesaid Act did not purport or make any provision to go for such a detailed enquiry or investigation.