Punjab-Haryana High Court
Karam Deen vs Subhash Chand And Ors on 12 August, 2024
LAVISHA
2024.08.13 13:52
I attest to the accuracy and
202
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAOQ-317-2004
DECIDED ON: 12.08.2024
KARAM DEEN -- ------------------ aaa APPELLANT
VERSUS
SUBHASH CHAND ANDANR =a... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present: None for the appellant.
Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate,
for the insurance company.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J (ORAL)
1. Present appeal has been filed by the injured namely Karam
Deen, aged about 16 years through his father Sh.Liakat Aali, by
challenging the award dated 20.11.2003, passed by learned Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambala (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby
MACT case No.88 dated 06.08.2001, filed under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (for short 'MV Act') has been dismissed.
2. Alleged accident took place on 19.05.2001 at about 6.00
P.M., while he was pedalling his bicycle on the left side of Shahbad Saha
Road, a truck bearing registration No.HR 46A 5751, owned and driven
by respondent No.1 namely Subhash Chand, coming from the opposite
direction, hit against the claimant/appellant, and as a result, he fell down
from his bicycle and received injuries on his foot.
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
3. While recording its findings in paragraph No.8 of the
impugned award, learned Tribunal has noticed that after the accident, the
child (appellant herein) was taken to Dr. Rakesh Aggarwal at Kesari
Hospital, where toe part of his right foot was amputated. Even, said
doctor has not been examined by the claimant before the Tribunal.
Even, no record of treatment has been placed to show that
the claimant suffered any injury in the accident. It is also observed that
the claimant had received a sum of Rs.3,700/- from respondent Nos.1 and
2 and still, the claim petition was filed by him.
Thus, the claim petition was dismissed.
4. As per office note, Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Advocate,
counsel for the appellant, has been informed telephonically, but still, no
one is present to represent the appellant today before this Court.
5. In these circumstances, this Court is left with no other
option, except to dismiss the present appeal for non-prosecution.
6. Accordingly, present appeal stands dismissed for non-
prosecution.
7. However, in case, any substantive issue still exists along
with cause of action, requiring its adjudication; liberty is granted to the
appellant to move an appropriate application for seeking revival of the
present appeal, within eight weeks from today.
8. It is clarified that if any such application is filed for seeking
revival of the appeal by the appellant, an advance copy of the application
would also be delivered to the opposite counsel i.e. respondent(s), and in
case, appeal is revived for its disposal on merits, for no reason, except for
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
FAO-317-2004 3-
the exceptional circumstances, hearing of the appeal would be deferred.
Therefore, both the sides should remain present and ready for the purpose of
addressing the final arguments.
9. Registry is directed to forward copy of the today's order at
the address of the appellant mentioned in the appeal.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
12.08.2024 JUDGE
Lavisha
Whether speaking/reasoned _ Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
authenticity of this order/judgment
