1 CGHC010239082026 2026:CGHC:29118 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 784 of 2026 M/s Om Rice Mill, Through Partner- Subhash Goyal, S/o- Devkinandan Goyal, Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of Sunder Ganj Ward, Dhamtari, Post Tahsil And District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Bansal Trade Links Through- Akash Agrawal , S/o- Niranjan Agrawal, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of House/shop No. 49, C- Market, Sector-1, Ward No. 38, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) (Registered Owner Of Hgv Hiwa No. CG 07 CR 8697) 2 - The Manager, United India Insurance, Company Limited, Office- Bastar Road, Dhamtari, In Front Of Peepal Jhad, Tikrapara, Dhamtari, Tehsil And District- Dhamtari (C.G.) (Insurer Of Vehicle No. C G Policy No.N 2705013123p 115086996) (Validity-14/02/2024 To 13/02/2025) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kunal Das, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.) Order on Board SUMIT KUMAR Digitally signed by SUMIT KUMAR Date: 2026.07.13 15:52:15 +0530 2 10/07/2026 1. Heard. 2. Present is a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 08.05.2026 passed by the learned Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari in Claim Case No. 135/2024, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 14 for taking document on record has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the applicant before the learned Claims Tribunal. He is prosecuting a claim case for compensation on account of damage to his property that occurred on 14.05.2024 in a motor accident by the offending vehicle hyva truck bearing registration No. CG-07 CR-8697, by which the boundary wall of his mill premises, his office and its furnitures have got damaged. With respect to the said accident, the driver of the hyva truck has been died and the Crime No. 162/2024 has also been registered by the Police Station - Arjuni. Since the driver of the offending vehicle has died, a closure report was submitted by the police before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari. He would further submit that the damage panchnama and other assessment reports were submitted before the police in the said offence and it was with the police record. He would also submit that due to bonafide mistake, the bills and other vouchers could not be produced before the learned Claims Tribunal. Since the documents are very relevant to assess the actual damage caused to the property of the petitioner, it may be taken 3 on record. There is no prejudice has been caused to the other side as they have every right to cross-examine the claimant's witness and raise objections during their examination. Though, there is some delay in filing those documents but in view of the beneficial law of Motor Vehicles Act and scheme of compensation under the motor accident claim, rejection of the application amounts to deprive the petitioner to put up his case for appropriate compensation, therefore, the application may be allowed and the documents may be taken on record. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material annexed with the petition. 5. On an specific query was being raised from the learned counsel for the petitioner as to what is the proceeding after 24.06.2026, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit, on instruction that today the case is fixed for recording evidence of the petitioner. 6. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the petitioner who was the claimant before the learned Claims Tribunal has taken 14 adjournments for recording of his evidence and ultimately filed the document alongwith the application under Order 7 Rule 14 of the C.P.C., the petitioner sought to produce the documents of bills and vouchers with respect to repairing of his damaged property which appears to be relevant document in the determination of compensation in the case. It also transpires from the document as well as the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that till date, the evidence of the petitioner-claimant has not been completed. 7. Although, the learned trial Court has observed for delay in filing the 4 application, however, it is also the fact that till date, the petitioner's cross-examination has not been started by the non-applicants and the dates were adjourned. 8. Considering the beneficial provision of the Motor Vehicles Act and the nature of the claim made by the petitioner before the learned Claims Tribunal that he is claiming compensation on account of the accident by which he suffered with the loss of his property, it would be appropriate to allow the petitioner to submit the document as has been filed by him alongwith their application under Order 7 Rule 14 of the C.P.C., however, it is made clear that on the next day fixed before the learned Claims Tribunal, the claimants shall examine himself and shall not take any unnecessary adjournment in the proceeding. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 08.05.2026 is set aside and the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 14 of the C.P.C. (Annexure A-3) is allowed. The learned Claims Tribunal shall proceed with the trial of the case in accordance with law after providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the parties and the documents may be taken on record subject to its admissibility in evidence. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE Sumit