Verma J. -- 1. Being aggrieved by award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhar dated 29.6.2005 in Claim Case No.48/04 whereby the learned Tribunal dismissed the application of the present appellant filed under section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act. This miscellaneous appeal is filed by the present appellant challenging the aforesaid award.

2. The case of the present appellant before the Tribunal was that on 9.2.2014, the present appellant was going to his residence situated at Bagdun from Eisher Chauraha, Pithampur in tempo bearing registration No.MTT-7950 as paid passenger in the vehicle. The vehicle was belonging to respondent No.2, which was driven by respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently due to which the vehicle overturned and the present appellant suffered injuries in his both the legs, hands and face. The appellant sustained fracture in his right leg. After the accident, he was taken to Lekhi Hospital at Pthampur. Next day i.e. on 10.2.2004 he was treated by Dr. Tiwari at Mhow and on 19.2.2004, he was admitted to Anand hospital at Indore. He was discharged from Anand hospital on 20.9.2004. On being discharged from the hospital he lodged an FIR before the Police Station Pithampur where the crime was registered on 1.3.2004. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident the appellant claims the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- from the respondents.

3. The respondents No.1 and 2 denied the assertion made by the present appellant. According to them, the vehicle was never involved in the accident. Some other unknown vehicle hit the appellant but as the vehicle of respondents No.1 and 2 normally plies on the route, registration number of the vehicle was given to the police. The respondent No.3 asserted before the Tribunal that respondent No.1 was not having valid and effective license at the time of accident. No permanent disability was caused to the appellant. There is no liability of the Insurance Company as there was breach of conditions and the insurance policy. Accordingly, the respondent prays that the insurance company be absolved of the liability of payment of amount of compensation.

4. The learned Tribunal after hearing both the parties passed the impugned award wherein the learned Tribunal held that the vehicle bearing registration No.MTT-7950 was not involved in the accident, however, the present appellant sustained 48% permanent disability due to a road accident. The Tribunal held that it was not proved that the respondent No.1 was not having effective and valid driving license at the time of accident and further held that the present appellant is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.94,679/- and interest thereon due to the injuries suffered by him in the accident. However, since the Tribunal held that the present vehicle was not involved in the accident the Tribunal the Tribunal dismissed the application and no compensation was awarded to the present appellant from the present respondent.

5. Aggrieved by such findings of the Tribunal the present appeal is filed challenging the inference of the Tribunal that the vehicle was not involved in the accident. The respondent No.3 challenged the findings of the Tribunal that it was not proved before the Tribunal that the respondent No.1 was not having a valid and effective driving license at the time of accident.

6. The moot question for decision of this appeal is whereter due to delay in lodging of the FIR it can be inferred that the present vehicle was not involved in the accident. It was falsely stated by the present appellant in the FIR that the vehicle belonging to respondent No.2 was involved in the accident. It is a trite law that delay in filing of FIR is not fatal either in criminal cases or in claim cases provided sufficient and cogent reasons for delay in filing the FIR are given. According to the present appellant, the delay in filing of FIR was due to the fact that he remained admitted in the hospital a