F.A.O.NO. 1748 OF 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 1748 OF 2010 Date of decision:30th July, 2010 Smt. Guddi and others .......Appellants Versus Pardeep and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate, for the appellants. None for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The appeal filed by the claimant was dismissed before the Tribunal on the inability to prove that the death arose out of the motor accident. The complainant relied on an entry in DDR maintained by the police that the respondent's vehicle had been involved in the accident. The complaint which was said to have been given by the driver of the offending vehicle had turned hostile and the claimants could not place any evidence before the Tribunal to show the involvement of the respondent vehicle. 2. In appeal there is also no better information available to improve the situation for the complainant. The case is purely factual and in my view, it has been correctly considered by the F.A.O.NO. 1748 OF 2010 2 Tribunal. The appeal by the claimants is dismissed. However, the claimants will be entitled to apply to the Government for compensation under Section 161 of the Motor Vehicles Act, on the basis of hit and run situation or the inability to apprehend the offending vehicle but the death as having resulted out of a use of motor accident. If such an application is filed before the appropriate authority at the instance of the claimants and the same is processed, then the amount should be disbursed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The appeal is disposed of as such. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 30th July, 2010 Shivani Kaushik