KAMLESH REGAR & ANR Vs. MAHAVEER PRASAD BAIRWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 11.5.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kota whereby the learned Tribunal has rejected the petitioners' application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that respondent-claimant, Mahaveer Prasad Bairwa, filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal on account of death of his wife, Smt. Mamta, in a road accident which occurred on 3.4.2006. The petitioners, non-claimants, filed reply to the claim petition and denied the averments made in the claim petition. On the basis of pleading of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed as many as five issues, including one of relief. On behalf of the claimant, five witnesses were examined and a number of documents were exhibited. However, no evidence was produced on behalf of the petitioners. Since no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioners during the course of hearing, on 21.6.2008 the learned Tribunal initiated ex-parte proceedings against them. Subsequently, after hearing the counsel for the claimant and considering the material on record, the learned Tribunal allowed the claim petition by an ex-parte award dated 28.6.2008 and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,09,000/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum, in favour of the respondent-claimant. On 26.9.2008, the petitioners filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex-parte award. However, by order dated 11.5.2010, the learned Tribunal has dismissed the application. Hence, this petition before this court.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that the petitioners' counsel before the Tribunal had told them a wrong date. Instead of telling the date as 21.6.2008, they were informed the next date as 21.9.2008. Therefore, for the fault of the counsel, the petitioners should not be made to suffer.