KUNDANA RAM Vs. R.S.R.TC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil misc. appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(C) of the CPC has been preferred by the appellants-claimants against the order dtd. 14/6/2018 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Bhilwara in Misc. Case No.18/2012 whereby the application filed under Order 9 rule 9 for setting aside the dismissal order dtd. 10/11/2010 passed in Claim Case No.524/2005 has been rejected.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that unfortunately, the claim petition of the appellants came to be dismissed in default in absence of the claimants as well as the counsel for the claimants vide order dtd. 10/11/2010. Thereafter, the application filed under Order 9 rule 9 of the CPC also came to be dismissed as the same has been preferred after delay.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 being a welfare legislation is promulgated for giving appropriate compensation to the family members of persons who die in motor accidents and therefore, strict compliance of procedure and principles of Civil Procedure Code may not be applied. It is submitted that soon after the information of dismissal of the claim petition, the appellants preferred the application for setting aside the dismissal order, but the learned tribunal rejected the application too, resulting into substantial failure of justice.