[2025:RJ-JP:8142] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4819/2015 1. Smt. Bhuli Devi W/o Shri Mohru Ram Bairwa, R/o Village Mohanpura Prithvi Singh Ka, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur (Raj.) (Owner through sell letter Vehicle Mahendra Marshal Jeep No. RJ 14-6C-547). 2. Nandu Gautam S/o Shri Ram Gautam, aged about 26 years, R/O Lakmipur, Police Station Jaitpur, Post Pakhanpat, Tehsil Pichhola, District Ambedkar Nagar (UP) (Driver of Vehicle Mahendra Marshal Jeep No. RJ 14-6C-547) ----Appellants Versus 1. Smt. Bala Jangir @ Dholi Jangir W/o Late Shri Ramesh Chand Jangir, aged about 34 years 2. Kumari Jyoti D/o Late Shri Ramesh Chand Jangir, aged about 15 years 3. Sanjay S/o Late Shri Ramesh Chand Jangir, aged about 13 years 4. Kumari Chandni, D/o Late Shri Ramesh Chand Jangir, aged about 11 years 5. Kumari Shivani D/o Late Shri Ramesh Chand Jangir, aged about 9 years Respondent Nos.2 to 5 through their natural guardian mother namely Smt. Bala Jangir @ Dholi Jangir W/o Late Shri Ramesh Chand Jangir 6. Jagdish Prasad S/o Shri Chhotu Ram aged about 71 years, All above R/o Renwal Manjhi, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur (Raj.) 7. Dinesh Kumar S/o Shri Ramkishan, R/o Kumaharon ka Mohalla, Rupvaas, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur (Rajasthan) (Registered Owner of Vehicle Mahendra Marshal Jeep No. RJ 14- 6C-547) ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4820/2015 1. Smt. Bhuli Devi W/o Shri Mohru Ram Bairwa, R/o Village Mohanpura Prithvi Singh Ka, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur (Raj.) (Owner through sell letter Vehicle Mahendra Marshal Jeep No. RJ 14-6C-547). 2. Nandu Gautam S/o Shri Ram Gautam, aged about 26 years, R/O Lakmipur, Police Station Jaitpur, Post Pakhanpat, [2025:RJ-JP:8142] (2 of 4) [CMA-4819/2015] Tehsil Pichhola, District Ambedkar Nagar (UP) (Driver of Vehicle Mahendra Marshal Jeep No. RJ 14-6C-547) ----Appellants Versus 1. Pappu Lal Jangir S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Jangir, aged about 29 years, R/o Mukam Post Daluwala, R/o Renwal Manjhi, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Dinesh Kumar S/o Shri Ramkishan, R/o Kumaharon ka Mohalla, Rupvaas, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur (Rajasthan) (Registered Owner of Vehicle Mahendra Marshal Jeep No. RJ 14-6C-547) ----Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Divyansh Saini, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Anshuman Saxena, Adv. For Respondents : Mr. Kapil Bhardwaj, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 24/02/2025 1. Both these appeals have been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 27.03.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Cases Tribunal (Special Court Communal Riots Cases), Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos.110/2014 and 111/2014. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the present appeals have been filed by the appellants i.e. owner along with the driver of the alleged vehicle against the impugned judgment and award dated 27.03.2015 passed by the Tribunal. After filing of these appeals, notices were issued to the respondents-claimants. [2025:RJ-JP:8142] (3 of 4) [CMA-4819/2015] 3. During pendency of the appeals, on 19.11.2024, a compromise deed has jointly been submitted by the parties to the lis. Vide order dated 13.02.2025, while allowing the application filed for taking the compromise between the parties on record, the Coordinate Bench of this Court directed that both the parties shall remain present before the Registrar (Judicial) for verification and attestation of the compromise. On 20.02.2025, the Registrar (Judicial) after hearing both the parties, has duly attested the compromise deed dated 19.11.2024, therefore, the matter has been listed today. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that in Claim Petition No.110/2014 learned Tribunal passed an award of Rs.1,91,465/- in favour of the claimants and in Claim Petition No.111/2014, an award of Rs.7,32,500/- was passed in favour of the claimants along with the interest @ 6% p.a. Learned counsel further submitted that in these appeals, the parties belong to the same family. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the parties have settled their dispute amicably and the appellant No.1- Bhuli Devi has paid an amount of Rs.7,75,000/- to the claimants- respondents, therefore, the present appeals may be disposed of, in view of the compromise. 6. Mr. Kapil Bhardwaj, Adv. appearing on behalf of the complainant/respondent No.2 admitted the factum of compromise between the parties. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted that payment of Rs.7,75,000/- has been made by the appellant No.1-Bhuli Devi in favour of the claimants-respondents. [2025:RJ-JP:8142] (4 of 4) [CMA-4819/2015] 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes amicably and also the payment has been made by the appellant No.1 in favour of the claimants, the impugned judgment and decree dated 27.03.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Cases Tribunal (Special Court Communal Riots Cases), Jaipur in Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos.110/2014 and 111/2014 is liable to be quashed. 9. In view of the above, these civil miscellaneous appeals are disposed of and the impugned judgment and decree dated 27.03.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Cases Tribunal (Special Court Communal Riots Cases), Jaipur in Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos.110/2014 and 111/2014 is quashed and set aside on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Consequence to follow. 10. Stay application and other pending applications, also stands disposed of. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J AARZOO ARORA /352-353S.