IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 316 of 1994 Date of decision: April 05, 2010 Bhoor Kaur and others .. Appellants Vs. Daya Singh and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. R.S. Longia, Advocate for the appellants. A.N. Jindal, J The appellants-claimants have preferred this appeal against the award dated 19.11.1993 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra, vide which their claim petition was dismissed. Arguments heard. According to the claimants, the accident took place on 19.9.1992 at about 7.00 p.m. on account of the fault on the part of the respondent No.1 who while driving tractor bearing registration No.PJV 9860 caused death of Angrej Singh. Consequently, the claim petition has been preferred which was contested and was ultimately dismissed. Heard. No case was registered under the relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code against the respondent No.1. The only action taken by the claimant was to proceed against him by way of filing the claim petition after five months of the accident. Besides herself, the claimant Bhoor Kaur has examined one Nar Singh (PW2) Lamberdar of village Babian. He appears to be a professional witness. He states that he being Lamberdar identified 150/200 persons in the court in the bail matters. It also includes the identification in sale deeds etc. All the identifications have been made in the Courts at Kurukshetra. Identifications in the cases of registration of sale deed were made at Ladwa also. This witness also could not withstand the test of cross examination. He informed Bhoor Kaur claimant regarding the accident only after 1- ½ months. Had he been present at the spot, he having seen the accident and knowing Angrej Singh F.A.O. No. 316 of 1994 -2- *** must have informed Bhoor Kaur forthwith and also got recorded the FIR with the police, but his was not done. It has been stated by HC Amar Singh (RW-2) that on 2.10.1992 relatives and son of the deceased came to PGI Chandigarh on coming to know about the death of Angrej Singh. He went to Chandigarh and recorded statements of Roop Singh son of Mohan Singh, Jaspal Singh son of the deceased and Labh Singh son of Tek Singh, who deposed that the deceased died due to the injuries sustained by him on a sudden slip of his motor cycle. He further deposed that he had physically verified the motor cycle which was in perfect condition and was not damaged. He further deposed that Jaspal Singh son of the deceased took the motor cycle himself on the next day after starting it. Thus, the appellants-claimants have badly failed to prove whether the accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the respondent No.1 while driving tractor bearing registration No.PJV 9860. Resultantly, finding no merit in the appeal the same is dismissed. April 05, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge