RANI DEVI Vs. MOHD. IQBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Widow, four minor children and parents of Surjit Kumar, who as per the case of the appellants was also named as Ashwani Kumar, have filed the present appeal challenging the award dtd. 13/5/2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pathankot (hereinafter to be referred as "the Tribunal") vide which the claim petition filed by the claimants/appellants has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that in the present case, under issue No.1, it was held that the deceased had died on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1- Mohammad Iqbal but the claim petition was rejected solely on the ground that the person who had died was Ashwani Kumar whereas the appellants/claimants were claiming themselves to be the widow, minor children and parents of Surjit Kumar. It is submitted that the said Surjit Kumar was also known as Ashwani Kumar and in spite of the death of said Surjit Kumar @ Ashwani Kumar in the accident which had taken place on 11/1/2012 due to rash and negligent driving of the truck bearing registration No.JK-02-J-7637, no compensation had been given to the present appellants. It is further submitted that the present appellants had filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Sec. 151 CPC, i.e., CM-16054-CII-2015 for leading additional evidence and a specific reference has been made to Annexure A-2 which is the Death Certificate issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department, Chief Registrar, Births & Deaths, Punjab, in which in the column of the name of the deceased his name has been mentioned as Ashwani Kumar @ Surjit Kumar. Reference has also been made to Annexure A-3 which is the resolution dtd. 13/8/2014 passed by the Gram Panchayat in the meeting held on 13/8/2014 in which it had been observed that Surjit Kumar was also known as Ashwani Kumar and he had died in the truck accident in Taragarh on 11/1/2012 and his name in the FIR was recorded as Ashwani Kumar on account of non presence of his family members at the time of the accident and reference has even been made to the Ration Card and other documents of the deceased.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the said additional evidence is very necessary for the proper and final adjudication of the case and in case, an opportunity is granted to the present appellants to lead the said additional evidence, then, the appellants would be able to establish that Surjit Kumar was also known as Ashwani Kumar and it was the said person who had died in the accident and thus, they would be entitled to compensation. It is submitted that in view of the same, the impugned award be set aside and the matter be remanded for a fresh decision. In support of his arguments, he has relied upon the judgment passed by the Delhi High Court in case titled as A. Rupin Manohar Through Sh. S. Anandha Kumar Vs. Mohd. Ansari & others, reported as 2017(4) ACC 7.