Nazakat Begum and Others vs Kali Ram and Others

G. P. Mittal, J.—The Appellants impugns a judgment dated 02.09.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Claims Tribunal) whereby a Claim Petition filed u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was dismissed by the Claims Tribunal. The Appellant''s contention is that FIR in this case was registered on the basis of the statement of Ishtiaq Ali, the deceased. He succumbed to the injuries suffered in the accident and thus the statement of Ishtiaq Ali became a dying declaration. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that during pendency of the Claim Petition Court Notice was issued to Respondents No. 2 and 3 which was not required and his evidence was abruptly closed on 08.03.1999.

I have perused the record. It is true that the FIR was registered on the basis of the statement of Ishtiaq Ali. The Appellants could have examined the person to whom the said statement was made even if no other eye-witness was available. In the facts and circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded back to the Claims Tribunal for affording an opportunity to the Appellant to examine the IO or any other witness in support of the Claim Petition.

Since this accident took place in the year 1989, the Claims Tribunal shall after recording the evidence decide the Claim Petition expeditiously preferably within six months.

Pending Applications stand disposed of.

Parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal on 24.09.2012. A copy of the order be sent to the Claims Tribunal for information and compliance.