31
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO No.235/2001
Date of Decision: 14th December, 2009
%
SH. KULDEEP SINGH BAWA & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through : Mr. O.P. Mannie, Adv.
versus
TIKA RAM & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Adv.
for R-3.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may YES
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES
3. Whether the judgment should be YES
reported in the Digest?
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The appellants have challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby their claim petition has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal.
2. The accident dated 27th September, 1994 resulted in the death of Veena Bawa. The deceased was survived by her husband, one son and one daughter who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal.
3. The deceased was crossing the road at Bhagat Singh Marg, opposite Jain Happy School on 27th September, 1994 at about 1:30 p.m. when she was hit by Maruti Van bearing No.DL-3C-E-7345. The deceased was working as teacher FAO No.235/2001 Page 1 of 3 with NDMC earning Rs.4,385/- per month at the time of the accident.
4. The learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition on the ground that the eye-witness who appeared in the witness box as PW-1 did not give the number of the offending vehicle.
5. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that the learned Tribunal shall conduct an inquiry into the claim petition. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that the learned Tribunal shall follow such summary procedure as it deem fit to conduct such an inquiry. The inquiry stipulated in Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act is different from the civil trial. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act casts a duty on the learned Tribunal to conduct an inquiry in a meaningful manner. The object of the legislature behind making this provision is that the victims of road accident are not left at their own mercy. If the learned Tribunal has any doubt about the involvement of the offending vehicle, the learned Tribunal should have summoned the Investigating Officer of the criminal case and should have perused the criminal record. However, no such inquiry has been conducted in this matter.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the offending vehicle was seized at the spot of the accident and the driver of the offending vehicle was prosecuted by the criminal Court.
FAO No.235/2001 Page 2 of 3
7. In that view of the matter, the findings of the learned Tribunal are liable to be set aside.
8. The appeal is allowed and the impugned award of the learned Tribunal is set aside. The case is remanded back to the learned Tribunal to conduct a proper inquiry under Sections 168 and 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned Tribunal shall summon the Investigating Officer and the criminal record pertaining to this case while conducting such an inquiry. The learned Tribunal while conducting an inquiry give adequate opportunity to both the parties before passing the award.
9. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 28th January, 2010.
10. The LCR be returned forthwith.
J.R. MIDHA, J DECEMBER 14, 2009 mk FAO No.235/2001 Page 3 of 3