The court's decision highlights the importance of considering all relevant factors, including the delay in filing the FIR, the evidence presented, and the credibility of the witnesses, when determining the validity of a claim petition in a motor vehicle accident case.

1. - The instant appeals have been filed by the appellants being aggrieved with the judgment and award dated 22.01.2014 passed by Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kushalgarh Sub-division Area, District Banswara (for short 'the tribunal' hereinafter) in Claim Case Nos. 19/2010 and 20/2010, whereby the tribunal has rejected the claim petitions filed by the appellants. Both the claim petitions were filed by the appellants alleging that on 25.04.2008 when they (father and son) were going on feet on the road in village Amripada Lemji, respondent No.1 Pradeep Kumar hit them while driving the auto rickshaw bearing No.RJ0- 3PA-0685 in rash and negligent manner. It was alleged that appellant-Dharma received injuries in his wrist of right hand resulted in a fracture and appellant-Mukesh received a fracture in his right hand and also received simple and grievous injuries on his face and other parts of the body. In the claim petitions, it was also alleged that auto rickshaw No.RJ0-3PA-0685 was owned by the respondent No.2-Bharat and insured with the respondent No.3-Insurance Company.

2. Learned tribunal, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence produced by the parties, has decided the Issue No.1 against the appellants and given finding that the appellants have failed to prove that on 25.04.2008, they met with an accident with auto rickshaw No.RJ0-3PA-0685 and received injuries. While giving this finding, the learned tribunal has dismissed the claim petitions filed by the appellants.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that on the basis of the complaint filed by the appellant-Mukesh, the police has investigated into the matter and filed charge-sheet against the respondent No.1 and this fact itself is sufficient to prove that the appellants have suffered grievous injuries in the accident took place on 25.04.2008 due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto rickshaw No.RJ0-3PA-0685. He has further argued that the learned tribunal has dismissed the claim petitions solely on the ground that the complaint regarding accident has been filed after a great delay. He has further submitted that once the charge-sheet has been filed by the police against the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident, the delay in filing the FIR cannot be made a ground for dismissing the claim petition.

4. On the strength of the above arguments, learned counsel for the appellants has prayed that the appeals may kindly be allowed and the matter be remanded to the learned tribunal for a fresh decision of the claim petitions filed by the appellants.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has argued that the appellants have failed to produce any convincing evidence, either oral or documentary, to prove that they had received injuries in the accident caused by auto rickshaw No.RJ0-3PA-0685 on 25.04.2008. He has further submitted that though the police has filed charge-sheet against the driver of the said auto rickshaw but that too in itself cannot be treated as conclusive proof to hold that the appellants have received injuries in the accident happened on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of auto rickshaw No.RJ0-3PA-0685. He has further submitted that the tribunal has found that the claim petitions were filed by the appellants in collusion with respondent No.2 Bharat, who happened to be their neighbour and belonging to same caste. He has further argued that the tribunal has not committed any illegality in rejecting the claim petitions filed by the appellants and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no case for interference is made out.

6. Heard learned counsels for the rival parties, perused the impugned judgment and award and carefully scanned the record.

7. It is not in dispute that the complaint about the accident was filed for the first time by the appellant-Mukesh Kumar in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Bagidora on 03.06.2008, though, as per the cl