ORDER

01. The present miscellaneous appeal is filed challenging the award dated 09.05.2023 whereby claim case filed by the respondents No.1, 2 & 3 has been allowed by directing these appellants to pay compensation of Rs.6,53,000/-.

02. The appellants were proceeded ex-parte, therefore, the ex-parte award has been passed. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that vide order dated 23.01.2020 the claim case was dismissed in default due to absence of the claimant's counsel thereafter, the claimants filed an application under Order IX Rule 5 of CPC for restoration of the claim case in which the notices were issued. These appellants appeared and vide order dated 03.02.2022 application was allowed and the Claim Case No.80/2018 was restored.

03. After restoration, no notice was issued to the claimants, his counsel Shri Sunit Parmar appeared on 26.02.2022 and sought time to file vakalatnama and written statement. He further appeared on 15.03.2022 and thereafter stopped appearing in the claim case. Accordingly on 19.04.2022 these appellants were proceeded ex-parte. On 19.04.2022 the learned Tribunal allowed the application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC whereby the word 'Truck' has been replaced by 'Bus'. The appellants could not get an opportunity to defend them before the Tribunal as no notice was given to them after non- appearance of their counsel. Therefore, the matter be remitted back to the Tribunal.

04. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that order dated 03.02.2022 was passed in presence of appellants, therefore, they had knowledge about restoration of claim case hence, it was their duty to appear in claim case through their lawyer. In civil Court the parties are supposed to appear alongwith the counsel on each and every date. Even if their advocate did not appear, they are required to remain present before the Tribunal.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

05. It is correct that on 03.02.2022 the order was passed in presence of appellants and claim case was restored but the counsel engaged by the appellants started appearing but all of a sudden he stopped appearing without giving any information to the appellants. The applicants were under the impression that their counsel is taking care of their case and as and when their presence is required they would be called. If the counsel pleaded no instruction or did not appear then the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for brevity ''MACT'') ought to have issued the notices to present appellants. Therefore, their non-appearance is bona fide and they were wrongly proceeded ex-parte, hence the impugned awrd is also liable to be set aside.

06. In view of the above, award dated 09.05.2023 is set aside and claim case is restored back to its original number and learned MACT is directed to proceed from the date 15.03.2022 when appellants were proceeded ex-parte. The proceedings which took place after the order dated 15.03.2022 treated as quashed.

07. While issuing notice in this appeal, this Court stayed the execution proceeding subject to deposit of Rs.2,00,000/-. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the appellants be directed to deposit 50% of the awarded amount of compensation as the claimants are aged father, widow and minor child.

08. In additional to the amount already deposited, the appellants are directed to deposit the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- before the learned MACT within 8 weeks from today. The entire amount be released to the claimants. In case appellants fails to deposit the amount as directed above within 8 weeks, then learned MACT shall pass the award in favour of the claimants without notice to the appellants. All the parties are directed to appear before the MACT on 24.05.2024. 09. With the aforesaid, this Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. 10. Let the record be sent back. (VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Divyansh