The court directed the Tribunal to entertain a fresh application for withdrawal of a claim petition with liberty to file anew, emphasizing that inadvertent procedural omissions by counsel should not deprive parties of the opportunity to seek substantive justice.

AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in the present Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside the impugned order dated 02.05.2026 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, whereby the application dated 30.04.2026 (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioners for taking up the case bearing No. MACP/342 of 2019 titled as ‘Sharda Devi and another vs. Sunil Kumar and others’ and for considering the statement dated 10.04.2026 (Annexure P-3) made by the petitioners for withdrawal of the main case with liberty to file a fresh claim petition has been dismissed.

2. As per the order dated 02.05.2026 (Annexure P-4), the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, observed that in the statement of the petitioners recorded before the learned Additional District Judge, Narnaul, on 10.04.2026 (Annexure P-3), the petitioners stated that the present claim petition be dismissed as withdrawn with permission to file a fresh claim petition . However, in the application dated 30.04.2026 (Annexure P-2) moved by the petitioners, it was mentioned that in view of the statements of the petitioners recorded on 10.04.2026, the petitioners wanted to withdraw the claim petition and the fact regarding liberty to file a fresh claim petition was inadvertently not incorporated by learned counsel in the said application. Therefore, the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, observed that it would be in the interest of justice if the petitioners file an appropriate application seeking permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh petition and that due opportunity be granted to the opposite party to file a reply thereto. Accordingly, the application filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul. The main case is now fixed for 24.07.2026 for the purpose already fixed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the fact regarding liberty to file a fresh claim petition was inadvertently not incorporated in the application dated 30.04.2026 (Annexure P-2). He further submits that he will move an appropriate application before the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, in this regard.

4. Heard.

5. In view of the facts of the present case, this Court feels that issuance of notice to the respondents would unnecessarily delay the proceedings, as such, issuance of notice to the respondents is dispensed with.

6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, that in case such an application is filed by the petitioners within time, the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, is directed to decide the same, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably on or before 24.07.2026, i.e. the date already fixed in the main petition.

7. Pending miscllaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.