NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MANU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Insurance Company challenges the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Solan awarding a sum of Rs. 7 lacs along with costs and interest to the respondent-claimant, who filed the claim petition in his capacity as a son of deceased Chuni Lal. The only point urged before me in this appeal is that the award deserves to be set aside as it is the outcome of the fraud and active concealment of facts by the claimant. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant refers to Ext. RX, which is the judgment passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula in MAC Petition No. 294 filed on 25.10.2001 and decided on 1.10.2002. Smt. Neelam Bajaj, widow, and Ashish Bajaj son of the deceased had instituted this claim petition before the learned Tribunal claiming compensation for the death of deceased Shri Chuni Lal. The learned Tribunal dismissed the petition in the absence of any positive evidence. I do not find any judgment/order on the record to the contrary whereby this award has been reversed/varied or modified.

(2.) Before the learned Claims Tribunal in the present petition, the claimant herein pleaded that he was a minor at the time when the accident took place. He claimed compensation on account of the death of his father late Shri Chuni Lal without disclosing the fact that prior to this, another petition had been instituted , which had been dismissed by the learned Tribunal at Panchkula.

(3.) What I find from the material placed before the Court below is that though the point regarding the concealment of facts seems to have been urged indirectly but no attention has been paid by learned counsel for the Insurance Company, who seems to have been very casual about the entire case. But that did not exonerate the learned Tribunal from adjudicating on this issue if it was otherwise disclosed from the facts. True, the active concealment of facts and fraud as required by Order 6 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure were not pleaded by the Insurance Company but these facts were plain and evident from the material on record and in this eventuality, present petition was not maintainable.