MUMTAJ KHAN AND ORS. Vs. SORUB ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this appeal, the Appellants seek to impugn the judgment dated 30.03.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby the Claim Petition filed by the Appellants under Sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act on account of death of their son in a motor accident was dismissed on the ground that the Appellants had failed to establish that the alleged offending vehicle was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by the Respondent No. 1, the driver of the alleged offending vehicle.

(2.) IN the course of arguments, the learned Counsel for the Appellants has placed on record certified copies of the charge -sheet dated 30.08.2006 and copy of the order dated 11.01.2010 passed by the court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, which clearly shows that in view of the plea of guilt entered by the Respondent No. 1 and on his giving a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/ - to the legal heirs of the deceased as compensation amount, the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act has been extended to the Respondent No. 1.

(3.) THE counsel for the Respondent No. 3 states that PW5, the eyewitness was examined by the claimant on 19.08.2008 and, therefore, the Appellants ought to have placed the charge -sheet before the learned Tribunal since the same was filed on 30.08.2006. Even assuming this to be so, it cannot be lost sight of that the Appellants are the claimants, who must have received the charge -sheet much after its filing and in any case the order dated 11.01.2010 on the plea bargaining of the Respondent No. 1 was passed during the pendency of the appeal.