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