PIAR KAUR Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE son of the present petitioners was driving a truck which was owned by Respondent No. 4, Shri Gian Singh. That truck met with an accident with a Punjab Roadways bus resulting into the death of the son of the petitioners. The petitioners filed a claim petition before the M.A.C.T., Amritsar for claiming compensation from the State of Punjab, Punjab Roadways and the driver of the bus involved in the accident. Gian Singh, owner of the truck which was being driven by the son of the petitioners was also arrayed as Respondent No.4 in the claim petition. He was not served despite many effort. Because of the non -service of Gian Singh, the owner of the truck, the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Amritsar dismissed the entire claim petition. This was led the petitioner to file the present revision petition.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contends that Sh. Gian Singh, owner of the truck, was a proforma respondent in the claim -petition and no relief was being claimed against the said -respondent, nor any relief was being claimed against the Insurance Company of the truck. If, for any reasons, Respondent No. 4, Gian Singh had not been served in the claim petition, the said petition could have been dismissed qua the said respondent and not against the other respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents could not successfully controvert this argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , this revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated January 5, 1995 is hereby set aside to that extent the claim petition been dismissed qua the State of Punjab, Punjab Roadways and the driver, Baldev Singh. The claim petition will stand dismissed against Sh. Gian Singh, Respondent No. 4.