GAFOORAN Vs. PARASRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellant against the order dated 30.4.1994 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hindaun City in Misc. Civil Application for restoration of MAC Case No. 187/1992, whereby the application for restoration has been dismissed treating it to be time barred.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant is a parda nasheen' illiterate lady, who sustained injuries in a motor accident and had filed a Claim Application before the Tribunal. She had engaged a counsel practicing at Hindaun City, but subsequently when new Court was created at Mahua, the said advocate shifted to that place and handed over the files to one Mr. Damodarlal Gupta, Advocate, who is based at Gangapur city. It was further contended that the appellant was never informed about the dismissal of her Claim Application on 17.7.1993 or that she was to appear on a particular date before the Tribunal at Hindaun City. It has been further contended that on 27.2.1994 when she was informed that her file has been handed over to Mr. Damodarlal Gupta, Advocate, resident of Gangapur City. Thereafter on contracting Mr. Damodarlal Gupta, Advocate, she was told that her Claim Application has been dismissed on 17.7.1993 in default. Soon thereafter, without wasting time, she filed the Misc. Application for restoration of her Claim Application. It has further been contended that her personal attendance was not required on 17.7.1993 since the case was fixed for summoning the respondents. It has also been contended that after the amendment in Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force with effect from 14.11.1994, there is no period of limitation for filing Claim Application. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court rendered in Dhannaial v. D.P. Vijayvargiya and Ors., 1 (1996) ACC 603 (SC).

(3.) Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the Claim Application was dismissed in default on 17.7.1993, and the Misc. Application for restoration was filed on 27.2.1994, i.e. much after the expiry of the period of limitation. It has also been contended that no affidavit of the counsel has been filed that he could not inform the claimant-appellant about the progress of her case. In this backdrop of the facts, learned Tribunal has rightly dismissed the Misc. Application for restoration.