Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Raman Dhankar vs Vinod Kumar on 30 January, 2017
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B.Cross Objection Civil No. 9 / 2014
Raman Dhankar
----Petitioner
Versus
Vinod Kumar
----Respondent
Connected With S.B.CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 3398 / 2012 Smt Geeta Devi And Others
----Appellant Versus Vinod Kumar And Others
----Respondent S.B.CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 3497 / 2012 Saraswati
----Appellant Versus Vinod Kumar
----Respondent S.B.CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 3625 / 2012 Raman Dhankar
----Appellant Versus Vinod Kumar
----Respondent S.B.CROSS OBJECTION CIVIL No. 15 / 2014 Saraswati
----Petitioner Versus (2 of 4) [XOBJC-9/2014] Vinod Kumar
----Respondent S.B.CROSS OBJECTION CIVIL No. 17 / 2014 Smt Geeta Devi And Others
----Petitioner Versus Vinod Kumar And Others
----Respondent _____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Anshuman Saxena & Mr.vinay Mathur For Cross-objector/s : S.S.Mahla For Respondent (s) : Mr.Rahul Khandelwal for Mr.Virendra Agrawal and Mr.Arvind Kumar Pareek for RSRTC _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Judgment / Order 30/01/2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties and after hearing both the parties, the cross-objections as also these appeals are being disposed of at this stage.
Brief facts of the case are that these appeals as also cross objections have been filed against the impugned judgment and award under appeals.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant/s submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award has not taken into consideration the objections which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeals. The finding of learned Tribunal on issue no.3 & 4 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal qua issue no.3 & 4 be quashed and set aside (3 of 4) [XOBJC-9/2014] and the matter be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh in the light of objections 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 may be permitted to raise all the objections and 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 award.
In my considered view, the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award has not gone through the facts of the case and passed the impugned award surreptitiously. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal needs interference by this court.
In the result, the appeals are partly allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua issue no.3 & 4 is quashed and set aside with the direction to the learned Tribunal to decide the matter afresh as early as possible, qua issue no.3 & 4 in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the appellants in the aforesaid appeals and the aforesaid judgment, if applicable and other judgments 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.
Both the parties request for specific date for appearing before the trial court, hence they are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 1.6.2017.
Record, if any, be sent forthwith. The amount which has been received by the (4 of 4) [XOBJC-9/2014] claimant/s shall not be recovered by the Insurance Company till afresh final decision of the claim petition.
As the main appeals have already been remanded, therefore, the cross-objections need not be decided at this stage. Hence the cross-objections being not survives are hereby dismissed. However, a liberty is given to the cross objectors to raise all their objections before the concerned Tribunal at the time of final arguments before it and the concerned Tribunal shall decided the same afresh before passing the award.
(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J.