Back
2017 Supreme(Raj) 146
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.
Ram Pal - Appellant
Versus
Mohan Lal & Anr. - Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1213 of 2007
Decided On : 14-02-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. Sandeep Mathur
For the Respondents: Mr. Aladeen Khan
Courts may interfere with an impugned award if it is found that the Tribunal did not thoroughly consider the facts of the case and passed the award surreptitiously.
Headnote:
Interference - Impugned Judgment and Award - Court finds impugned award needs interference and remands the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration
Fact of the Case:
The appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award passed by the MACT. The appellants argue that the Tribunal did not consider their objections and the findings on certain issues are contrary to the available material.
Finding of the Court:
The court finds that the impugned award needs interference as the Tribunal did not thoroughly consider the facts of the case. The appeal is partly allowed, and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.
Issues: The issues revolve around the Tribunal's consideration of the appellants' objections and the findings on specific issues.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to interfere with the impugned award is based on the Tribunal's failure to thoroughly consider the facts of the case and pass the award surreptitiously.
Final Decision: The appeal is partly allowed, the impugned judgment and award are quashed and set aside, and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and after hearing both the parties, the appeal is being disposed of at this stage.
2. Brief facts of the case are that this appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and award passed by the MACT.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellants 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 appeal. The finding of learned Tribunal on issue no. 1, 2 and 3 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal qua issue no. 1, 2 and 3 be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh in the light of grounds which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents 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 issues, and he may be permitted to raise all the objections to the grounds as have been raised in this appeal.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned award.
6. 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.
7. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua on aforesaid issue is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh as early as possible, qua the aforesaid issues in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the appellants in the aforesaid appeal and the 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.
8. Both the parties request for specific date for appearing before the trial court, hence they are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 05/07/2017.
9. Record, if any, be sent back.
