SARABJIT KAUR Vs. PAPPU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE scooter of the husband of the claimant/Petitioner met with a motor vehicular accident on 3.2.2004 with the three wheeler (offending vehicle) driven and owned by Respondents 2 and 3 respectively. At that time Petitioner was undertaking journey as a pillion rider on the said scooter. In the accident she allegedly suffered "Cord Edema at C.5 level" for which she remained hospitalised for several days and is allegedly still undergoing treatment. It is further alleged that she has suffered 100% disability. With these allegations, she filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act in the year 2004. It is further alleged that for the injuries suffered in the said accident the Petitioner who is still undergoing treatment incurred medical expenses during the period from 14.9.2009 to 12.4.2010. The claim petition is reportedly at the argument stage. Petitioner moved two applications -one for placing on record the medical bills pertaining to the period from 14.9.2009 to 12.4.2010; and another application for examining 9 witnesses to prove the expenses incurred by her on the said treatment. However, both her applications were dismissed vide impugned order dated 14.5.2010 by the learned MACT, Ludhiana. Hence the present revision petition.

(2.) IT is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the learned MACT has erred in dismissing both the applications on the ground that the Petitioner is trying to delay the proceedings. It is submitted that in fact the Petitioner being a claimant is very much interested in early disposal of her claim petition, but at the same time she cannot afford to suffer a loss of about Rs. 1.44 lacs, as the bills sought to be placed on record amount to Rs. 1.44 lacs approximately.

(3.) AFTER hearing counsel for both the parties and going through the impugned order, in my opinion, the present revision petition is liable to be accepted and Petitioner deserves at least some reasonable opportunity to placed on record the aforesaid medical bills and examine the necessary witnesses in that regard since they relate to periods post closing of the evidence by the claimant/Petitioner and have a direct bearing on determination of compensation.