[2025:RJ-JP:21803] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6688/2025 Ramesh Chand Gurjar Son Of Ramkaran Gurjar, Aged About 47 Years, Resident Of Village Badli, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Govindram Gurjar Son Of Gordhan Gurjar, Resident Of Village Haripura, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk (Driver Maruti Swift Car No.rj-14-Cy-9184) 2. Ramrai Gujar Son Of Jagdish Narayan Gurjar, Resident Of Dhani Gujran, Village Mohammadpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur (Owner Maruti Swift Car No.rj-14-Cy-9184) 3. The New India General Insurance Company Limited, Having Its Regional Office At Nehru Palace,tonk Road, Jaipur Through Its Regional Manager (Insurance Company Maruti Swift Car No. Rj-14-Cy-9184) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Mathur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/05/2025 This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 29.03.2025 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (for brevity, “learned MACT”) whereby, an application filed by the petitioner/claimant for reopening of his evidence has been dismissed. Assailing the order, the only contention advanced by the learned counsel for claimant is that he could not lead evidence on account of unavoidable circumstances and he may be given only [2025:RJ-JP:21803] (2 of 3) [CW-6688/2025] one opportunity to lead his entire evidence. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed, order impugned dated 29.03.2025 be quashed and set aside and he may be afforded one more opportunity to lead his entire evidence. Heard. Considered. Indisputably, evidence of the claimant was closed by the learned MACT vide order dated 21.02.2025 only when, despite availing sufficient opportunities, they failed to lead it. Ordinarily, this Court would not have interfered with the order impugned rejecting claimant’s application for reopening the evidence in the aforesaid circumstances; however, taking into consideration the object and spirit of the provisions of the Act of 1988 which are beneficial in nature for the claimant and in the peculiar facts of this case wherein, the claimant is seeking compensation on account of injuries sustained in the road accident, this Court deems it just and proper and in the interest of justice to afford the claimant one more opportunity to lead his evidence. In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of in following terms without issuing notice to the respondents to obviate further delay and not to enburden them with unnecessary litigation cost: 1. The order dated 29.03.2025 is quashed and set aside. 2. The claimant is granted one opportunity to lead his entire evidence either on the next date fixed before the learned Tribunal or within a period of four weeks thereafter, if the learned Tribunal so directs. [2025:RJ-JP:21803] (3 of 3) [CW-6688/2025] 3. If the respondents feel aggrieved by this order, they are at liberty to move an application for its recalling. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /51