Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ARSHAD FAEEYAZ versus ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE MORADABAD & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Arshad Faeeyaz v. Addl. District Judge Moradabad & Others - WRIT - C No. 16990 of 2003 [2005] RD-AH 7388 (13 December 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

                                                                                       Court No.38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 16990 of 2003

Arshad Faeeyaz        vs.       Additional District Judge, Court No. IX,

                                          Moradabad and others

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

An award dated 12.4.2001 was passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Court No.9), Moradabad against the petitioner and in favour of Respondent nos. 2 to 9. By the said Award the petitioner was liable to pay an amount of Rs.1,17,000/- to the said respondents. The petitioner thereafter filed an application for the recall of the Award which was dismissed in default on 19.7.2002. The petitioner then filed a restoration application which has been allowed vide order dated 22.3.2003, on the condition of deposit of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the respondents, has submitted that because of the pendency of this writ petition and the stay order having been granted, the claimant-respondents are suffering irreparably and thus had made a statement that this writ petition may be allowed and the claim petition of the respondents may be heard afresh, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the claimant-respondents.

In view of such statement having  been made by Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the Respondents, the Award dated 12.4.2001 passed by Respondent no.1 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.143 of 1997 is set aside and it is directed that the Respondent no.1 shall give opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as claimant-respondents and decide the claim petition expeditiously, but not later than one year from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order before it. The Respondent no.1 shall also not grant any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

Subject to the aforesaid directions this writ petition stands allowed. No order as to cost.

Dt/-13.12.2005

dps


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.