BALBIR KAUR Vs. SH AMRIK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT -claimants filed claim petition No. 79 of 1988 before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Amritsar. Kasturi Lal died on 19. 10. 1989 in a vehicular accident. Kasturi Lal is the husband of claimant-appellant No. 1 and father of remaining claimant-appellants. Thus, the claimants filed a claim petition No. 79 of 1988 on 29. 10. 1990 claiming 8 lacs as compensation. Along with the claim petition, they also filed a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. This petition was contested by respondents. In support of her petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, Claimant Balbir Kaur examined herself. She testified that after death of her husband, she was not keeping good health and was getting treatment in the village. She was not guided by any person to file claim petition and after one year of death of her husband, she learnt that she is entitled to file such an application to get compensation. Hence, the application was filed after one year. The learned Claims Tribunal has dismissed the petition as the petition was filed beyond the period of limitation. Under Section 166 clause (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 such a claim petition is to be filed within six months of the occurrence of the accident, but the Claim Tribunal is given power to entertain the application after expiry of the said period of six months but not later than twelve months, if it is satisfied that the applicant/claimant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application in time. In this case, accident took place on 19. 10. 1989 and the petition was filed on 29. 10. 1990, i. e. after 12 months from the date of accident. Hence, the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly rejected the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act being time barred so far as claim with regard to] Balbir Kaur was concerned. For holding this view, I take support from Vinod Guras Raikar v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. , 1991 (II) A. C. J. 1060 and Asokan v. State of Kerala, 1992 (1) A. C. J. 477. But so far as other claimants are concerned, they were minors on the day when the claim petition was filed. Hence, under Section 6 of the Limitation Act, these claimants were entitled to file claim petition on gaining majority. The learned Claims Tribunal failed to take this fact into consideration and, hence, he rejected the claim petition filed by these minors also on the said ground.

(2.) ACCORDINGLY , this appeal is partly allowed. Appeal so far as Balbir Kaur is concerned is dismissed, but it is allowed with regard to the remaining claimants. The impugned order is set aside and this claim petition is remanded to the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Amritsar to decide it in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Amritsar on 15. 3. 1996. Lower Court's record be sent .