SUHRID KUMAR ROY CHOWDHURY Vs. KAWSALLA DEBI KHATICK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Rules arise out of two claim proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act and were obtained against orders of the Tribunal below, refusing the Petitioner's claim for raising an additional issue.

(2.) It appears that, in answer to the claim of the claimants opposite parties, the Petitioner filed a written statement containing certain allegations that one Harbachan Singh and not the Petitioner was liable for the opposite parties' claim, if any, and an issue, therefore, as to the liability of the Petitioner or Harbachan Singh for the Petitioner's claim, if any, for compensation under the Act immediately arose on the said pleadings. In the circumstances, we are not satisfied that the Tribunal below acted properly in the exercise of its jurisdiction in refusing to frame an additional issue on the point. It is true that there was already an issue, namely Issue No. 3, covering in substance a part of the said question. But that was not comprehensive enough from the above point of view. It is, therefore, necessary for the Tribunal below, for a proper decision of the instant case, to raise an issue on the question of liability, if any, of the Petitioner or Harbachan Singh for the opposite parties' alleged claim.

(3.) We, accordingly, direct that the Tribunal below will frame an additional issue raising the said question and upon framing such an issue, Issue No. 3, which already stands, would become unnecessary as it would be covered by the said additional issue. As to the terms in which the said additional issue has to be raised, the matter is left to the Tribunal below and it will see that a comprehensive issue is raised on the point.