[2025:RJ-JP:2225] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10171/2007 Ramuram S/o Hari Khinwaram, Ganeshpura, Via Dakiya Gowati, Police Station Khatushyamji, District Sikar Raj.. ----Claimant Versus 1. Pappu Singh Ola S/o Vidyadhar Ola, Kudali, Police Station Raghunathgarh, District Sikar. Driver Vehicle No. Jeep No. Rj-23-Ua-0069-Tr No. 733 2. Keshar Dev Jankhar S/o Gharsiram, Udailal Ki Dhani, Police Station Sadar Sikar, District Sikar. Owner Vehicle No. Jeep No. Rj-23-Ua-0069-Tr No. 733. 3. The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Regional Branch, Near Court, District Sikar Raj. Insurance Company Vehicle No. Jeep No. Rj-23-Ua-0069- Tr No. 733 ----Non-claimants For Claimant(s) : Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat For Non-Claimant(s) : Mr. Sagar Jindal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 16/01/2025 This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner- claimant (for short ‘the claimant’) against the orders dated 13.11.2007 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2 and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar (for short “the Tribunal”) in motor accident case No. 636/2005, whereby the evidence of the claimant has been closed and the order dated 29.11.2007, whereby the application filed by the claimant for reopening his evidence has also been dismissed. [2025:RJ-JP:2225] (2 of 3) [CW-10171/2007] Learned counsel for the claimant submits that due to unavoidable circumstances the claimant could not appear before the Tribunal on 13.11.2007. Resultantly, the Tribunal vide order dated 13.11.2007 closed the evidence of the claimant and the matter was fixed for final arguments. After that, learned counsel for the claimant filed an application before the Tribunal for reopening the claimant’s evidence but the Tribunal vide order dated 29.11.2007 dismissed the application filed by the claimant. Learned counsel for the claimant also submits that absence of the claimant for adducing the evidence before the Tribunal was bona fide. So, in the interest of justice, the orders dated 13.11.2007 and 29.11.2007 passed by the Tribunal be set-aside and one more opportunity may be given to the claimant for adducing the evidence before the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the non-claimants has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimant and submitted that ample opportunities were given to the claimant for adducing the evidence before the Tribunal but the claimant had not appeared before the Tribunal. So, the Tribunal rightly closed the claimant’s opportunity for adducing the evidence vide its order dated 13.11.2007 and rightly dismissed the claimant’s application. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimant as well as learned counsel for the non- claimants. It is an admitted position that the claimant could not appear before the Tribunal. So, his evidence was closed by the Tribunal. So, in the interest of justice, I deem it just and proper to grant an opportunity to the claimant to adduce the evidence before the [2025:RJ-JP:2225] (3 of 3) [CW-10171/2007] Tribunal subject to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- by the claimant. Accordingly, petition filed by the claimant is allowed. The orders dated 13.11.2007 and 29.11.2007 passed by the Tribunal are set-aside. The Tribunal is directed to grant only an opportunity to the claimant to adduce his evidence before the Tribunal, subject to deposition of cost of Rs.10,000/- by the claimant with Rasthan State Legal Services Authority and on producing the receipt in this regard before the Tribunal on or before next date of hearing, failing which no opportunity shall be granted by the Tribunal to the claimant to adduce the evidence. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Tahir/41