PAWAN KUMARI Vs. SATPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The unfortunate claimants, who lost their source of sustenance in a motor accident, have approached this Court by way of present appeal. They filed a Claim Petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon (for short, 'the Tribunal') seeking compensation for the death of Subhash Yadav in a motor vehicular accident. The Tribunal dismissed the said petition vide Award dtd. 7/2/2013. The poor claimants went in appeal but their first appeal has also brushed aside by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh vide order dtd. 18/11/2019.

(3.) Some of the admitted facts are that FIR No.30 dtd. 14/2/2012, under Ss. 279/227/304A IPC, was duly registered in respect of the fatal accident at Police Station Baswa, District Dousa(Rajasthan). The driver and owner of the vehicle are facing trial which is stated to be pending. The postmortem report also clearly establishes that the deceased Subhash Yadav died on account of the injuries suffered in a motor Vehicular accident. In light of these admitted facts and in view of the scope of the powers conferred upon the Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, we fail to understand the logic which prompted the Tribunal to reject the Claim Petition on the premise that the factum of death of Subhash Yadav in the reported accident is not proved. One of the reasons, namely, the delay in registration of FIR is a question to be gone into by the Criminal Court where the driver and owner of the delinquent vehicle are facing trial. The Tribunal ought not to have influenced by these irrelevant considerations. We do not want to observe anything further as it would amount to expression of views on merits. Suffice it to say that the claim of the appellants requires to be determined on merits and in accordance with law.