FAO-5082-2015

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

FAO No. 5082 of 2015 (O&M)

Date of Decision: December 19, 2018

Sushil Kumari and others

........APPELLANTS

VERSUS

Shyam Sunder and others

........RESPONDENTS

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Rajat Garg, Advocate for

Mr. Aditya Jain, Advocate

for the appellants.

Ms. Vandana Malhotra, Advocate

for respondent No. 3.

*******

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

CM-15739-CII-2015

Heard on the application for condonation of delay. There is

delay of 278 days in filing the appeal.

As per the applicants, deceased-Jagdish was sole bread earner

of the family. Appellant No. 1-Sushil Kumari (wife of deceased) was

collecting relevant documents required for production in the case. When she

approached her counsel, she came to know that her evidence had been

closed, resulting in dismissal of her claim petition. She was not intimated

immediately by her counsel after dismissal of the claim petition which

resulted in delay of 278 days in filing the appeal.

Keeping in view the above facts, supported by affidavit, delay

of 278 days in filing the appeal, is hereby, condoned.

Jyoti

2018.12.22 14:16

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-5082-2015

2

FAO-5082-2015

Heard.

The claim petition filed by the appellants on 10.05.2013 under

Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was dismissed on 06.03.2014

under Order 17 Rule 3 CPC by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon

(now Gurugram) after closing the evidence of the claimants. It was observed

that claimants had been afforded six opportunities to produce evidence but

they failed to examine any witness.

Learned counsel for appellants submits that claimant-appellant

No. 1 is wife of deceased-Jagdish and appellant No.-2 i.e. her daughter was

studying in Nepal. Appellant No.1 being an illiterate lady could not arrange

the required documents and witnesses resulting in closer of evidence by

order.

Keeping in view the fact that it is a social legislation enacted to

help the victim's family, whose relative/bread earner had died or suffered

injuries in the accident. Though, the claimants were allowed a number of

opportunities to produce evidence, still I am of the opinion that instead of

dismissing the claim petition under Order 17 Rule 3 CPC, the claimants

should be allowed opportunity to produce evidence before the Tribunal to

get their petition decided on merits.

In view of the above, this appeal is allowed. Order dated

06.03.2014 is set aside. The Tribunal is directed to take the claim petition

bearing MACT No. 43 of 10.05.2013 on board, allow two effective

opportunities to the claimants to lead entire evidence and then decided the

same on merits in accordance with law.

Jyoti

2018.12.22 14:16

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-5082-2015

3

The claim petition was dismissed on 06.03.2014. In the event of

the compensation being allowed, the claimants will not be entitled to any

interest on that amount for the period from 06.03.2014 till 19.12.2018.

The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on

17.01.2019.

( SURINDER GUPTA )

JUDGE

December 19, 2018

Jyoti-II

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No

Whether Reportable:

Yes/No

Jyoti

2018.12.22 14:16

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

High Court, Chandigarh