Guru Charan Samal and Another vs Smt. Vijaylaxmi Devi and Another

S.C. Mohapatra, J.—This is an appeal u/s 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act read with Section 173 of M.V. Act, 1988.

Claimants who are parents filed an application claiming compensation for death of their only son alleging the same to be in a motor vehicle accident. Claim petition was filed beyond the period of limitation with a petition for condonation of delay. In the petition for condonation of dealy it was stated that on account of resulted shock for death of their only son, claimants lost their balance of mind and could not take any steps. Tribunal has held that the period of delay has not been explained.

Condonation of delay is a benevolent provision where there is sufficient cause. When the claimants have asserted that on account of death of the only son, they lost their balance of mind, I am satisfied that in the facts and circumstances of this case delay has been explained and there is sufficient cause. Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay. Accordingly, I condone the delay.

Claimants should not get premium on their difficulties in respect of which the owner and the insurer are not responsible. Accordingly, in case claim petition is allowed, the compensation amount shall not carry any interest till today. That would sufficiently mitigate prejudice of the owner and the insurer.

Tribunal is directed to entertain the claim petition and take steps for making enquiry on merits.

In the result, appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.