MALARKODI Vs. GNANASEKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (The case has been heard through video conference)

(2.) This Appeal is filed by the appellants, being aggrieved by the dismissal of the claim petition for non-prosecution. The reason stated in the impugned order is that earlier, in the year 2012, the claim petition was dismissed for default and later restored on file. In spite of restoration, the claim petitioners did not co-operate with the Trial. Hence, on 06.06.2014, the claim petition was dismissed for default again. The attempt of the claim petitioners to restore the petition for the second time failed, since the 1 st claimant has not substantiated the cause for not attending the Court on the date of hearing. The Tribunal, pointing out that the 1 st claimant has not filed any medical evidence for fever, disbelieved the claimant and dismissed the restoration petition thereby, the claim petition was dismissed.

(3.) The Learned Counsel for the appellants would submit that the claim petitioners are rustic villagers. After losing the sole breadwinner in the road accident, they were not properly informed and due to the illness of the 1st claimant, the others were not able to follow the case with the counsel.