Skip to content


Surjit Kaur and ors. Vs. General Manager, Punjab Roadways and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectInsurance;Motor Vehicles
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported inI(1986)ACC177
AppellantSurjit Kaur and ors.
RespondentGeneral Manager, Punjab Roadways and ors.
Excerpt:
- administrative law - government contract: [vijender jain, c.j., rajive bhalla & sury kant, jj] government contract rejection of highest bid challenge as to held, state has no dominus status to dictate unilateral terms and conditions when it enters into contract. its actions must be reasonable, fair and just in consonance with rule of law. as a necessary corollary thereto, state cannot refuse to confirm highest bid without assigning any valid reason and/or by giving erratic, irrational or irrelevant reasons. the state is free to enter into a contract just like any other individual and the contract shall not change its legal character merely because other party to contract is state. though no citizen possesses a legal right to compel state to enter into a contract, yet latter can..........to negligence. this, in turn, was based largely upon the date of accident being recorded in the claim application as june 9, 1983 whereas evidence was led to show that the accident occurred on june 8,1983. mr. m.l. sarin, counsel for the claimants attributed this to a mere typing error, namely ; that the date of the accident was worngly written as june 9, 1983 instead of june 8, 1933. to rectify this error, he sought amendment of the claim-application with a view to mentioning therein the date of the accident being june 8, 1983.2. there can be no manner of doubt that this is an ovious case of mere typing error and interest of justice thus impel allowing the amendment as prayed for. the impugned award of the tribunal is accorningly hereby set aside and the tribunal is directed to.....
Judgment:

S.S. Sodhi, J.

1. The claim for compensation filed by the claimants, they being the mother, widow and minor son of Joginder Singh deceased, was declined, on the Tribunal returning a finding against them on the issue relating to negligence. This, in turn, was based largely upon the date of accident being recorded in the claim application as June 9, 1983 whereas evidence was led to show that the accident occurred on June 8,1983. Mr. M.L. Sarin, counsel for the claimants attributed this to a mere typing error, namely ; that the date of the accident was worngly written as June 9, 1983 instead of June 8, 1933. To rectify this error, he sought amendment of the claim-application with a view to mentioning therein the date of the accident being June 8, 1983.

2. There can be no manner of doubt that this is an ovious case of mere typing error and interest of justice thus impel allowing the amendment as prayed for. The impugned Award of the Tribunal is accorningly hereby set aside and the Tribunal is directed to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. Cost of this appeal shall be costs of the proceedings.

3. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on June 10, 1985,


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //