TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 1337
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Uttar Pradesh in MACT No. 131 of 2010. 3. In order to appreciate the short issue involved in this appeal, it is necessary to state a few relevant facts: 4. The Respondents-Claimant(Plaintiffs) filed a Claim Petition under Sections 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short 'the M.V. Act') against the Appellant-Corporation before the Tribunal, Hathras claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 36,35,880/- for the death of one Raj Kumar Gautam, who died in a vehicular accident. According to the Respondents, on 22.09.2010, Raj Kumar Gautam-the deceased while going on his Motor Cycle bearing No. UP-86F-9224 on Hathras-Agra road near a place called 'Ghas Mandi' was hit by the Appellant's bus bearing Registration ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....egality and correctness of the impugned order contended that the High Court without adverting to all the factual details and grounds raised in the appeal, disposed of the appeal in a cryptic manner. According to learned Counsel, the High Court neither set out the facts, nor dealt with any issue, nor appreciated the ocular and documentary evidence in its proper perspective, nor examined the legal principles applicable to the issues arising in the case and nor rendered its findings on contentious issues decided by the Tribunal though urged by the Appellant in support of the appeal. 11. Learned Counsel further contended that it was the duty of the High Court exercising its first appellate powers under Section 173 of the M.V. Act to have dealt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. The Plaintiff, unsuccessful in two Courts, has come up here aggrieved by the dismissal of his suit which was one for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The Defendant disputed the Plaintiff's title to the property as also his possession and claimed both in himself. The learned Munsif, who tried the suit, recorded findings against the Plaintiff both on title and possession. But, in appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge disposed of the whole matter glibly and briefly, in a few sentences. 2. An appellate court is the final Court of fact ordinarily and therefore a litigant is entitled to a full and fair and independent consideration of the evidence at the appellate stage. Anything less than this is unjust to him and I h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ischarged the duty expected of it.... 19. The above view was followed by a three-Judge Bench decision of this Court in Madhukar and Ors. v. Sangram and Ors. (2001) 4 SCC 756, wherein it was reiterated that sitting as a court of first appeal, it is the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. 20. In H.K.N. Swami v. Irshad Basith (2005) 10 SCC 243, this Court (at p. 244) stated as under: (SCC para 3) 3. The first appeal has to be decided on facts as well as on law. In the first appeal parties have the right to be heard both on questions of law as also on facts and the first appellate court is required to address itself to all issues and decide the case by giving ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tricted by law, the whole case is therein open for rehearing both on questions of fact and law. The judgment of the appellate court must, therefore, reflect its conscious application of mind and record findings supported by reasons, on all the issues arising along with the contentions put forth, and pressed by the parties for decision of the appellate court. Sitting as a court of first appeal, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tate of Punjab and Anr. v. Navdeep Kaur and Ors. (2004) 13 SCC 680]. 25. Coming now to the facts of the case in hand, we consider it appropriate to reproduce the whole order of the High Court infra: The only ground urged is that there was contributory negligence also on the part of the deceased and therefore, the compensation awarded should have been reduced proportionately. We have perused the site plan and we find that the accident occurred on a crossing. The site plan clearly indicates that the offending vehicle namely the Bus was on the right side of the road left no scope for the deceased who was traveling on the left side of the road. Consequently, we are of the opinion that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the d....