Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Smt Chawli Devi And Others vs Om Prakash Kulhari And Others on 7 September, 2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.
J U D G M E N T
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2235/2010
1. Smt. Chawli Devi, wife of Late Shri Lal Chand
alias Lalaram, aged 29 years
2. Dharma son of Late Shri Lal Chand alias
Lalaram, aged 11 years
3. Vinod son of late Shri Lal Chand alias
Lalaram, aged 9 years
4. Smt. Shanti wife of Shri Kaluram, aged 66
years
No. 2 to 3 are minors through their natural
guardian and mother Smt. Chawli Devi wife of
Late Shri Lal Chand alias Lalaram
All by caste Khatik, resident of Acharol,
District Jaipur (Raj.)
....Claimants Appellants
Versus
1. Om Prakash Kulheri son of Shri Chandrabhan
Kulheri, resident of Kahad Bas, Bhuhana, District
Jhunjhunu and at present Driver Khetan Logistic
Pvt. Ltd., A-37, RIICO Industrial Area, Kukas,
Jaipur (Raj.) (Driver)
2. Khetan Logistic Pvt. Ltd., A-37, RIICO
Industrial Area, Kukas, Jaipur (Raj.) through
partner (Owner)
3. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Regional
Office, Anand Bhawan, Sansar chandra Road, Jaipur
through Regional Manager
...Non Claimants Respondents
2
DATE OF JUDGMENT : 7.09.2016 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr. Sandeep Mathur, counsel for appellant(s) Mr. Pritam Bijlani, counsel for the respondent/s This appeal has been filed by the appellant(s) against the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant(s) submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award has not taken into consideration the grounds which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal(s). The finding of learned Tribunal on issue no. 4 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal qua aforesaid issue(s) be quashed and set aside and the matter should be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh qua aforesaid issue(s) in the light of grounds which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal(s).
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent(s) though opposed the same but requested that the learned Tribunal may be directed to hear him/them at the time of deciding the matter afresh on the aforesaid issue/s, and he/they may be permitted to raise all the objections to the grounds as have been raised in this appeal.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned judgment and award.
In my considered view, the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award has not appreciated the facts of the case and the grounds raised by the learned counsel for the appellant(s) by way of instant appeal(s) in a 3 proper manner and passed the impugned judgment and award surreptitiously. Thus, the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal needs interference by this court.
In the result, the appeal(s) is/are partly allowed; the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua aforesaid issue(s) is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh qua aforesaid issue(s) as early as possible, in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the appellant(s) by way of the aforesaid appeal(s) and the judgment(s) to be cited by learned counsel for the parties, if any, after issuing notice to all the concerned parties and giving opportunity of hearing to them.
However, it is made clear that if any amount has been received by the claimant(s) under the impugned award, the same shall not be recovered from him/them till disposal of the claim petition by the learned Tribunal afresh qua aforesaid issue(s).
Both the parties have requested for a specific date for their appearance before the Tribunal, hence they are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 5.12.2016.
Record, if any, be sent back.
(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J. DK