UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAJIYA @ RAZIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MAC. APP. 257/2017 and CM No. 10217/2017

(2.) The DAR records that on the said date at about 10.30 a.m. when respondent no.1 was trying to cross the road, a motorcycle suddenly came in front of her and while she tried to save herself, she fell on the road and before she could recover a truck-like vehicle, which appeared to be government owned, being driven rashly and negligently injured her and drove away. Respondent no.1 further stated that thereafter she lost consciousness and some unknown person had slipped the vehicle's number in her bag, which was taken home by her son. She had reiterated that the vehicle was being driven at a great speed, negligently and rashly, and she promised to give the number of the vehicle to the I.O. The report further states that the vehicle was identified as being owned by the appellant. It was impounded and subsequently released. The driving license of the driver Mr. Jai Prakash, as well as the documents of the vehicle were taken by the police; the mechanical inspection of the vehicle revealed that the front bumper had been scratched/scrapped; the vehicle was released on superdari upon orders of the Court and proceedings were initiated against the driver under Sections 279/ 338 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The learned counsel for respondent no.1 submits that the driver has been chargesheeted by his employer. In reply to the claim petition, no written statement/ defence was filed and it was so recorded by the Tribunal on 18.01.2016. Resultantly, the appellant's right to file a written statement/ defence was closed. The written statement was filed much later thereafter, however, it was not taken on record. The subsequent application for condonation of delay too was disallowed. In effect, the appellant did not respond to the claim petition.