HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2830/2018

Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office E-8,

Riico Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur Through Its Constituted

Attorney.

---Non-Claimant-Appellant

Versus

1.

Manoj Kumar S/o Ramkishore, R/o Gorir, Presently R/o

Ward No. 6, Opposite Ganni Colony Jail, Town, Jhunjhunu,

Teh. And Distt. Junjhunu Raj.

Claimant-Respondent

2.

Yetes S/o Jagmal Singh, R/o Abusar, Teh. And Distt.

Jhunjhunu Raj. (Driver And Registered Owner Of Maruti

Suzuki Alto Car No. Rj-18-Ca-7102)

---Non-Claimant-Respondent

For Appellant(s)

:

Mr. Virendra Agrawal, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Lokesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

09/09/2022

Reportable:

Instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant-

Insurance Company against the judgment and award dated

12.03.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in

Claim Case No.548/2013 whereby an amount of Rs.44,93,342/-

was awarded as compensation on account of the injuries sustained

by claimant-respondent- Manoj Kumar in the accident occurred on

23.01.2013.

Learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the

evidence on record and after hearing counsel for the parties,

(2 of 8)

[CMA-2830/2018]

decided the claim petition of the claimant-respondent and

awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.44,93,342/- under

various heads in favour of the claimant-respondent.

The issue involved in this appeal is that “whether

photocopies of un-exhibited documents can be taken into

consideration by the Tribunal for assessing the income of the

claimant and passing the award?”

Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company

submits that the respondent-claimant submitted a claim petition

before the Tribunal seeking compensation for the injuries

sustained by him in an accident occurred on 23.01.2013. Neither

any permanent disability certificate was produced on record nor

any doctor was examined to prove the disability suffered by the

claimant-respondent. Counsel submits that in this matter,

evidence of the claimant-respondent was closed on 07.01.2017

and thereafter the case was posted for recording the evidence of

the non-claimants since no evidence was produced by the non-

claimants, their evidence was closed on 25.03.2017 and the case

was posted for final arguments on 13.04.2017. Counsel submits

that thereafter the matter was deferred for one date to another for

final arguments, but all of a sudden on 17.02.2018, photocopies of

certain documents were submitted on the record of the Tribunal

without supplying a copy of the same to the appellant-Insurance

Company and the matter was posted for final arguments on

06.03.2018 and the impugned award has been passed on

12.03.2018. On the basis of the photocopies submitted by the

claimant-respondent, an exorbitant award to the tune of

Rs.44,93,342/ has been passed against the appellant-Insurance

Company. Counsel submits that it is a well-settled proposition of

(3 of 8)

[CMA-2830/2018]

law that no photocopies of any document can be taken into

consideration at the time of final arguments unless and until these

documents are submitted on record through a proper process

following the law and these documents cannot be read or relied

until and unless the same are marked as exhibits on the record.

Counsel submits that the photocopies of these documents

could not have been taken into consideration even without

supplying a copy of the same to the appellant-Insurance Company.

Counsel submits that the appellant-Insurance Company did not

get any opportunity to submit any evidence in rebuttal and cross-

examine the witnesses. Counsel submits that a novel procedure

has been adopted by the Tribunal while