[2026:RJ-JP:10700] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4185/2016 1. Smt. Kishnai Devi wife of Late Shri Kishan Lal alias Kanaram, aged 50 years 2. Lada Devi daughter of Late Shri Kishan Lal alias Kanaram, aged 32 years. 3. Sayar daughter of Late Shri Kishan Lal alias Kanaram, aged 30 years. 4. Surgyan daughter of Late Shri Kishan Lal alias Kanaram, aged 28 years. All R/o village Madhopura, Tehsil Dudu, P.S. Dudu, District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Claimants-Appellants Versus 1. Shabbeer Ahmed Yakub Ahmad, R/o Khedali Khurd, P.S. Firojpur Jeerka, District Nuhur, Mevat, (Haryana) (Driver Truck No.RJ-14-GB-0121) 2. Harpreet Singh son of Shri Harpal Singhy, R/o E-Transport Nagar, Kumar Trading Transport Company, Jaipur (Raj.) (Owner Truck No.RJ-14-GB-0121) 3. The National Insurance Company Limited, Regional Officer, Near Jyoti Nagar Turn, Bhawani Road, Jaipur through Regional Manager, (Insurance Company Truck No.RJ-14-GB- 0121) ----Non-Claimants-Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sandeep Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajeev Bhushan Bansal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 13/03/2026 1. The present appeal has been filed by the claimants- appellants (for short “the claimants”) against the judgment dated 26.04.2016, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (for short “the Tribunal”) in MAC Case No.383/2014, whereby the learned Tribunal dismissed the [2026:RJ-JP:10700] (2 of 3) [CMA-4185/2016] claim petition filed by the claimants on the ground that the claimants failed to adduce the evidence to prove their claim. 2. Learned counsel for the claimants submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, the claimants could not adduce the evidence before the learned Tribunal. Hence, in the interest of justice, the present appeal may be allowed and the claimants’ be allowed to adduce the evidence before the learned Tribunal so that the claimants can prove their case. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimants and submitted that the learned Tribunal had granted ample opportunities to the claimants for adducing the evidence but the claimants failed to adduce evidence before the learned Tribunal, therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly dismissed the aforesaid claim petition and prayed to dismiss the present appeal. 4. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. From a perusal of the record, it is clear that ample opportunities were given to the claimants but the claimants failed to lead the evidence in support of their claim. However, in the interest of justice, this Court deems it appropriate to grant further opportunity to the claimants to lead the evidence. 6. Accordingly, the instant appeal filed by the claimants is allowed. The impugned judgment dated 26.04.2016 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Tribunal to decide the claim petition afresh after giving not more than two opportunities to the claimants for adducing the evidence. [2026:RJ-JP:10700] (3 of 3) [CMA-4185/2016] 7. It is made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted by the learned Tribunal to the claimants for adducing the evidence. It is further made clear that period commencing from 26.04.2016 till today shall not be counted for the purpose of calculating interest on the compensation, if any, awarded by the learned Tribunal after due adjudication of the aforesaid claim petition. 8. It goes without saying that the respondents shall also be entitled to adduce the evidence before the learned Tribunal in accordance with law. 9. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 20.04.2026. 10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 11. Registry is directed to supply a certified copy of this order to the learned Tribunal. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J AVINASH GULERIA /39