PRITAM SINGH PANNU Vs. RATTAN LAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aim of the appellant in this appeal is to have a remand reopening the matter so that he can enter the witness-box and examine evidence in support of his cause.

(2.) As is plain from the award under appeal, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh granted a number of opportunities to the claimant-appellant for producing his evidence. Those opportunities were not availed of. Finally on 15-4-1982, the claimant as also his counsel were present. Even then the claimant-appellant was not prepared to adduce his evidence. The Tribunal specifically asked him whether he would appear in the witness and be examined on that date itself but the claimant declined doing so on the ostensible plea that no documents supportive of his case were with him. Additionally, he pleaded that he had lost his son in an accident a month prior to that date and for that reason was in a disturbed state of mind. The Tribunal was not impressed by the claimant's reasons and thus closing the case dismissed the claim application.

(3.) The plea of the appellant's counsel is of compassion showing his preparedness to compensate the other side with adequate costs. Costs obviously appropriate means to sell off the neglect of the losing party. It is one of the cardinal principles of civil trials that whenever the other party can be compensated with costs, the neglect of the losing party should be ignored unless the conduct of that party was malicious, wilful and contumacious. No such blemish can be pointed out against the appellant except that he was neglectful to pursue his cause. Having regard to these facts and as suggested by the learned counsel for the parties, I order as follows: