( 1 ) PETITIONER, an old man of 60 years and a resident of Bihar, suffered a tragedy in the loss of his son, Gopal, aged 22 years, in a road accident on 13. 7. 1999. Petitioner filed a claim for grant of compensation under Sections 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on 16. 8. 1999, while being personally present. Shri S. L. Bhayana, learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, declined to issue summons and this led the petitioner to file the present petition in October 1999. A learned Single Judge of this Court ordered rule to be issued.

( 2 ) PETITIONER moved CM. 221/2000, seeking interim directions so that, at least, the petition could be registered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karkardooma, Delhi. Notice of the application was directed to be issued to Shri U. Hazarika, Standing Counsel, Union of India and Shri S. K. Kaul, Senior Advocate.

( 3 ) LET me notice the factual matrix of this case:

(I) Petitioner filed the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on 16. 8. 1999, annexing therewith the Site Plan, the seizure memo of the offending truck, certificate of insurance, registration book of the of- fending truck, driving licence of the truck driver, post-mortem report, superdarinama, charge-sheet and the photocopy of the FIR.

(II) The learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, finding the documents as not legible, directed the return of the petition for filing legible copies. Thereupon petitioner moved an application on 16. 8. 1999 itself, through his counsel, pointing out that the charge-sheet was also filed alongwith the petition, from which the name of the driver could be ascertained and the petition could be registered, even if the Court was finding the FIR to be not legible.

(III) The application also records that the Reader of the Court was requested to take cognizance of and rely on the copy of the FIR which is sent by the Investigating Officer to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for registration of the petition. Further, it was not specified as to which documents were not found legible by the Tribunal. Petitioner craved indulgence of the Court since he had come from Bihar, The learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal passed the following order :

"pr : Shri Lokesh Kumar, counsel for the petitioner: He has moved an application which is being disposed of. I have perused the file. The copy of the FIR filed by the petitioner is not legible. He is directed to file legible copy of the FIR and the petition be, therefore, returned to the petitioner for filing the same. He is also directed to file the copy of the ration card of the petitioner and he is also directed to bring the original ration card and original photo identify card and show the same to the Court at the time of presenting the petition. The petition is hereby "returned to the petitioner for doing the needful. "

(III) Petitioner did not yet give up his effort to have the petition registered and moved yet another application on 17. 8 1999. Petitioner, recounting the documents filed, i. e. the FIR, charge-sheet, post-mortem report, etc. , as received from the police, urged that he was not in possession of the original documents, which were in the custody of the police and on the criminal Court file. Petitioner urged that he would prove the required documents during trial. It was again prayer that the petition be registered and the summons be issued. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal thereupon passed the following order on 18. 8. 1999. "

"pr : Shri Lokesh Kumar, counsel for the petitioner. An application has been moved under Section 151, CPC, on behalf of the petitioner. Heard. No ground. The application is dismissed. Petition be. returned to the petitioner for compliance of order dated 16. 8. 1999. "

( 4 ) PETITIONER, by the present petition, seeks quashing of the aforesaid two orders and directions for registration of the claim petition and issuance of the summons in the petition. Petitioner also prays for formulation of