LAWS(HPH)-2019-9-29

SANJAY KUMAR Vs. BAJU RAM AND OTHERS

Decided On September 06, 2019
SANJAY KUMAR Appellant
V/S
Baju Ram And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged order dated 08.05.2019, passed in CMA No. 202-N/6 of 2019, by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. vide which an application filed by the present petitioner, who is respondent No. 1 before the learned Tribunal, under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 169(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act for allowing respondent No. 1 to appear as a witness in support of his case, has been disallowed.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present petition are that a claim petition has been filed filed by claimant Baju Ram seeking compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- on account of injuries received by him in an accident involving vehicle Tata Ace bearing Registration No. UK07CA-3606. Present petitioner, who is the owner of the offending vehicle, has been impleaded as respondent No. 1 in the claim petition. Driver of the vehicle has been impleaded as respondent No. 2 and Insurance Company is impleaded as respondent No. 3. After the respective parties filed their response to the claim petition and also led evidence in support of their respective versions and the matter was being taken up for final hearing, an application was filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 169(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act by the present petitioner in which it was mentioned that as respondent No. 3, i.e. Insurance Company, during the course of leading its evidence, had produced a driving licence Mark X and its verification report Ext. RW1/F, purportedly pertaining to the driver of the owner, the petitioner be permitted to lead evidence qua the effect of the said documents as the documents were placed on record by respondent No. 3 after the evidence of the petitioner stood closed. This application stands rejected vide impugned order by learned Tribunal by assigning the following reasons:-

(3.) Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed the present petition.