IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH

th

ON THE 15 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. APPEAL No. 286 of 2013

NAVALSINGH RAJPUT

Versus

JAGAT SINGH YADAV AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri R.P.Gupta - Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Bal Krishna Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent

No.3/Insurance Company.

ORDER result, the appellant sustained serious injuries. From the spot of the accident, the appellant was taken to Prasad Nursing Home, Hajira, by 108 ambulance for treatment. Thereafter, on 28.12.2011, he was admitted to Parivaar Hospital, Gwalior, where X-rays were taken and fractures were found in the right knee and above the knee. On 30.12.2011, an operation was conducted on the right knee, a steel plate was inserted, wiring was done, and a rough plaster was applied. Subsequently, on 22.03.2012, another operation was conducted on the right leg and a steel rod was inserted. The accident was reported at Police Station Purani Chhawani and a case was registered against respondent No.1 under Sections 276 and 337 of the IPC vide Crime No. 67/12. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against respondent No.1 in the competent court. It is pleaded that due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant suffered permanent disability in his right leg, resulting in loss of earning capacity, mental and physical suffering, and financial loss on medical treatment, medicines, hospital charges, doctor’s fees, and transportation expenses.

This appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant under Section

173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the award dated 27.11.2012 passed by the Seventh Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Gwalior (M.P.) (hereinafter referred to as “the Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 109/2012, whereby the claim petition filed by the

appellant/claimant was rejected.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 26.12.2011 at about 6:30 p.m., the

appellant left his dispensary on his motorcycle and proceeded towards his house at Char Shahar Ka Naka. While he was driving slowly and reached in front of the house of Munna Yadav on Gola Ka Mandir Road, Purani Chhawani, a Maruti Van bearing registration No. MP-07 GA 1258, driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, hit the appellant. As a

3. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 proceeded ex parte and respondent No.3/Insurance Company filed the written statement and denied the claim averments.

4. Learned Claims Tribunal has framed the issues and after recording the evidence, rejected the claim petition filed by the claimant.

5. Being aggrieved by the impugned award, the appellant preferred this appeal contending that the Claims Tribunal committed an error in rejecting the claim petition. It is submitted that the impugned award is against the facts and contrary to settled principles of law. It is further submitted that the police registered a case against the driver of the offending vehicle and filed a charge-sheet after investigation, but the Claims Tribunal ignored this material aspect as well as the evidence adduced by the claimant. Hence, it is prayed that the impugned award be set aside and a just and reasonable amount of compensation be awarded.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3/Insurance Company has supported the impugned award and prays for dismissal of instant appeal.

7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Claims Tribunal.

8. It is true that if the claimant has been able to demonstrate satisfactory and cogent reason for delay in lodging the F.I.R. then delay in lodging F.I.R. should not be treated as fatal for such proceeding. The Apex Court in case of Ravi Vs. Badrinarayan and Others AIR 2011 SC 1226 in para 20 and 21 has held as under:-

"20. It is well-settled that delay in lodging FIR cannot be a ground to doubt the claimant’s case. Knowing the Indian conditions as they are, we cannot expect a common man to first rush to the Police Station immediately after an accident. Human nature and fa