##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 197/2020

1. Smt. Kunti Devi W/o Late Shri Vedprakash, Aged About

44 Years, R/o Village Bachhamadi, Tehsil Nadbai, District

Bharatpur.

2. Pramod Kumar S/o Late Vedprakash, Aged About 26

Years, R/o Village Bachhamadi, Tehsil Nadbai, District

Bharatpur.

3. Dushyant Kumar S/o Late Vedprakash, Aged About 24

Years, R/o Village Bachhamadi, Tehsil Nadbai, District

Bharatpur.

4. Rakesh Kumar S/o Late Vedprakash, Aged About 22

Years, R/o Village Bachhamadi, Tehsil Nadbai, District

Bharatpur.

----Appellants

Versus

1. Yatendra Kumar S/o Shri Gopal Prasad, R/o Village

Painghor, Nagla Dadu, Tehsil Kumher District Bharatpur.

(Driver Of Vehicle Car Rj-05-Ca-1787)

2. Amar Chand S/o Gurudutt, R/o Village Murbara, Tehsil

And District Bharatpur (Owner Of Vehicle Car Rj-05-Ca-

1787)

3. United India Insurance Company Ltd., Numayash Road,

Bharatpur Through Branch Manager (Insurer)

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. J.K. Moolchandani

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajeev Bhushan Bansal

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

05/02/2026

1. The instant civil misc. appeal has been preferred against the

judgment dated 06.12.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Bharatpur (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in MAC Case

No.601/16 (157/15), by which the claim petition submitted by the

claimants-appellants (hereinafter referred to as ‘the claimants’)

has been rejected on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR.

(Uploaded on 05/02/2026 at 04:36:51 PM)

(Downloaded on 10/02/2026 at 10:29:44 PM)

(2 of 5) [CMA-197/2020]

2. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that when the

deceased Vedprakash, after completing his duties was returning

home on 23.12.2014, one vehicle/car bearing No.RJ-05-CA-1787

rammed him from behind and he died on the spot because of the

injuries sustained by him in the accident. Counsel submits that the

FIR of the aforesaid incident was registered on 01.01.2015,

wherein charge-sheet was submitted against the Driver of the

offending vehicle by the Investigating Agency and thereafter, the

instant claim petition was submitted by the claimants for getting

the amount of compensation from the respondents. Counsel

submits that instead of deciding the claim petition on its merits

and demerits, the same has been rejected on a technical count of

delay i.e. 07 days delay in lodging the FIR with the concerned

Police Station. Counsel submits that in such like matters, the claim

cannot be rejected on this count alone.

3. In support of his contentions, counsel has placed reliance

upon the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court

at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the case of Kiran Singh Rajpurohit

and Others vs. Suresh Rajpurohit and Others while deciding

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2549/2016. Counsel submits that

under these circumstances, interference of this Court is

warranted.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondents opposes the arguments raised by counsel for the

claimants and submits that when the incident has occurred on

23.12.2014, there was no reason or occasion available with the

claimants or anyone to not to lodge the FIR in the instant case.

(Uploaded on 05/02/2026 at 04:36:51 PM)

(Downloaded on 10/02/2026 at 10:29:44 PM)

(3 of 5) [CMA-197/2020]

The FIR has been registered after seven days, for which no

reasonable explanation has been given, hence, the Tribunal has

not committed any error in rejecting the claim petition submitted

by the claimants.

5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and

perused the material available on record.

6. Perusal of the record indicates that an FIR was registered on

01.01.2015, wherein it was alleged that the deceased was

returning to his village Bachhamadi from Nadbai from duty and

when he reached opposite Jain Mandir Gaushala on NH-11, a

Wagon-R car bearing No.RJ-05-CA-1787 hit him and he died on

the spot.

7. After usual investigation of the aforesaid FIR, charge-sheet

was submitted against the Driver of the offending vehicle