Hon’ble Vivek Kumar Birla, J.—No one is present on behalf of the respondents even in the revised call.

2. The case is of the year 2008 and the matter is listed for final hearing/disposal.

3. I have heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

4. Appellant herein Smt. Seema Pandey w/o of late Satish Chand Pandey is claimant No. 1 in the claim petition being M.A.C.P. No. 645 of 2006 (Smt. Seema Pandey and others v. Manoj Kumar and another). Smt. Seema Pandey and others have filed the claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Etawah under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation for accidental death of her husband; father of claimant No. 2-Kumari Rakhi, Claimant No. 3-Kumari Raksha and claimant No. 4-Kunal; and son of claimant No. 5-Sri Kripashankar and claimant No. 6-Smt. Sarojani.

5. Facts of the present case are that the claim petition was returned by the learned Tribunal by the impugned order dated 2.9.2008 for being presented before the competent tribunal. It was alleged in the claim petition that Satish Chand Pandey met with an accident on 30.8.2006 at about 10 p.m. when he was coming from Ramleela ground