- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Can...
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Can Recall Its Own Order If Claimant Plays Fraud: Gujarat High Court
PRIYANKA PREET
27 July 2022 9:30 AM GMT
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that when a party before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, in this case claimant, plays a fraud with the Tribunal, the Tribunal is empowered to recall its order by which it granted relief.Justice Gita Gopi observed,"The review application would survive having fallen under Order 47(1) of CPC since it was an error apparent on the face of record....
"The review application would survive having fallen under Order 47(1) of CPC since it was an error apparent on the face of record. Even otherwise, as it was urged of fraud by the driver and owner, the Tribunal had power to recall its own order."
The instant application was filed by the Insurance Company challenging the order of the Tribunal rejecting its review petition which sought recall of award in favour of the claimant on the ground that the claimant was not insured on the date of accident and had forged the insurance document.
The High Court noted that the Tribunal had rejected the review application since the Insurance Company had not even filed its written statement in the claim petition. Further, the disputed document was not adduced as evidence in the matter and hence, the review application was dismissed.
It directed the Claims Tribunal to consider the claim petition afresh, from the stage of evidence. It relied on Anita vs Rambilas to reiterate: "If it is proved that one of the party has played fraud on the Court, then only the review petition is maintainable under section 151."
Reliance was also placed on United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Rajendra Singh where it was held that remedy to move for recalling the order on the basis of the newly discovered facts amounting to fraud of high degree, cannot be foreclosed.
"No court or tribunal can be regarded as powerless to recall its own order if it is convinced that the order was wangled through fraud or misrepresentation of such a dimension as would affect the very basis of the claim."
Thus, taking into account Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC for 'Application for Review of Judgement', Justice Gopi held that the instant review application would survive despite the delay of 4 years. It was explained that the delay condonation application was condoned by the Tribunal and the question of delay would not arise at the instant stage.
The Bench noted that the Jeep was not insured with the Insurance Company on the date of the accident and hence, the Petitioner was not liable to satisfy the award. Accordingly, the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal while it was directed that the compensation be kept in a Fixed Deposit.
Case No.: C/SCA/16750/2019
Case Title: THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD v/s THAKOR KANAJI VIRAJI
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 289
