Back
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
BHAWANI SINGH
VIDYA DEVI - Appellant
Versus
HIMACHAL ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION - Respondent
F. A. O. No. 57 of 1989
Decided On : 06/12/1989
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - SECTION 110-A(3) - DELAY IN FILING CLAIM PETITION - CONDONATION OF DELAY - SUFFICIENT CAUSE - INTERPRETATION - LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION - FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED - ILLITERACY, IGNORANCE, DESPERATION, FINANCIAL STRINGENCY AND ILLNESS.
Fact of the Case:
Vidya Devi, a widow whose husband died in the service of the nation, met with an accident in 1974 while travelling in a Himachal Road Transport Corporation bus. She sustained multiple injuries and became paralytic and mentally unsound. She filed a claim petition for compensation in 1987, beyond the limitation period of six months prescribed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. She sought condonation of delay, citing her illiteracy, ignorance, financial stringency, and the mental and physical ailments she suffered as sufficient cause.
Finding of the Court:
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal rejected Vidya Devi's application for condonation of delay, holding that she failed to establish sufficient cause for the delay. The court found that the Tribunal took a superficial and unjudicial approach in examining the case and failed to appreciate the evidence on record.
Issues: 1. Whether the delay in filing the claim petition was due to sufficient cause? 2. Whether the Tribunal erred in interpreting the term 'sufficient cause' under section 110-A(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the evidence on record was sufficient to establish sufficient cause for the delay in filing the claim petition. It considered factors such as Vidya Devi's illiteracy, ignorance, financial stringency, and the mental and physical ailments she suffered as sufficient cause for the delay. 2. The court held that the Tribunal erred in interpreting the term 'sufficient cause' under section 110-A(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, in a narrow and restrictive manner. It held that the term should be construed liberally in favor of the claimant, especially in cases involving illiterate, ignorant, and financially disadvantaged individuals.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Tribunal, and directed the Tribunal to take up the matter on its original number and proceed with the matter immediately and decide the same on merits within a period of three months.
Bhawani Singh, J.—Calamities do not come alone, they come in chain ; so appears to have happened to Vidya Devi, who at a very young age slides into the position of widow-hood on the death of her husband late Nand Ram in the war in 1965. This calamity was followed by a dispute relating to the entitlement of pension admissible on the death of her husband and this dispute with her father-in-law came to be settled somewhere in 1968. Thereafter her father-in-law transferred the family property in the names of his surviving sons leaving her to depend on her parents being issueless. In this very chain of events, she herself was involved in an accident on 21-2-1974 while travelling by Himachal Road Transport Corporation bus. She claimed compensation for the personal injuries she sustained in- this accident by a claim petition but the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandi, rejected her petition holding that she could not ask for compensation for her bleeding injuries as the doors of the court stood closed for her by lapse of time. However, she continues her efforts to approach this Court through her brother as her next friend.
2. The brief facts of this case are that while travelling in the Himachal Road Transport Corporation bus going from Mandi to Rewalsar, the bus (No. HPM 395) met with an accident on 21-2-1974. The cause of the accident is stated to be due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver. It happened while the vehicle was passing over a culvert The appellant sustained multiple injuries on her head as well as the other parts of the body with the result that she remained unconscious for months together in Civil Hospital, Mandi, and ultimately turned paralytic as well as mentally unsound and her mental health continued as such till the date of filing of the petition. She turned a permanently disabled person, not in a position to take care of herself even in walking and needed a permanent helper.
3. She filed this petition on 20-10-1987 and in view of the provisions of section 110-A (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the same could not be entertained beyond the period of six months of the occurrence of the accident provided that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal was satisfied that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application in time. The petitioner had moved the Tribunal for the condonation of delay in filing the petition late. Number of circumstances have been explained in detail by production of documentary and oral evidence. This application was contested by the Himachal Read Transport Corporation which insisted for the dismissal of the petition of the petitioner being grossly barred by time in the absence of sufficient cause within the meaning of the proviso to section 110-A (3) of the Act, I proceed to examine the evidence adduced by the petitioner showing sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the claim petition.
4. Chandermani, (PW 1), is the brother of Vidya Devi. He has filed this petition as a next friend of the appellant. He states that Vidya Devi sustained injuries on her head and had started bleeding from her nose and ear. She was admitted in the District Hospital, Mandi. Because of the injuries, she had become unconscious and she remained unconscious continuously for one month. She remained in the hospital for about two months. The doctor advised that she be taken home and made to walk by providing her help. She became paralytic and her right arm and right leg do not work. After the accident, she could not talk properly and could not identify persons properly. Her husband was in the army who died in active service in 1965. The appellant is illiterate and has no issue and she herself is not in a position to prosecute the petition; so, as next friend, he filed the claim petition on her behalf Her father-in-law, after the death of the husband of the appellant and before the accident, had transferred the land in the names o
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
