FAO No.3342 of 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. FAO No.3342 of 2002 Date of decision: January 07, 2009 Sunita ...Appellant Versus Secretary, Transport, H.R.T.C., Shimla ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Vijay Lath, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. Rajan Gupta, J. The appellant has preferred the present appeal against the award dated 21st February, 2002, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar, whereby the claim of the appellant has been dismissed on all counts. The Tribunal held that the claimant had neither been able to prove that she was occupant of the bus which met with an accident nor that the bus was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and even the claim was barred by limitation. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant. He has mainly contended that the Tribunal had ignored evidence on record while returning the finding that the claimant was not entitled to any compensation. The counsel contended that in the claim petition a FAO No.3342 of 2002 2 specific averment was made by the appellant that she was travelling in the bus which was involved in the accident. In reply to this averment, the respondents had only stated that the said para needed no reply being not applicable. This averment amounted to an admission on the part of the respondents. However, I am not impressed with this argument as the respondents merely stated in reply to para 10 of the claim petition that the same did not need any reply. This per se would not lead to the conclusion that the appellant was travelling in the bus which met with the accident. The appellant had to discharge this onus independently by leading cogent evidence. However, the appellant merely referred to the FIR which was registered in respect of the accident which took place on 16th March, 1993. She was not able to produce any ticket to show that she was a passenger of the bus which was involved in the accident. No other evidence or record was produced by the appellant to show that she was travelling in the bus in question except her own oral testimony. In my considered view, this is not sufficient to hold that the appellant was an occupant of the bus which fell in the ditch on 16th March, 1993 and that the same was being driven in a rash and negligent manner. Moreover, the accident took place on 16th March, 1993 and the claim petition was filed on 14th August, 2000. The Tribunal thus came to the conclusion that the claim petition was barred by limitation as at the relevant time, the limitation prescribed under the Motor Vehicles Act for filing a claim petition was only six months. FAO No.3342 of 2002 3 I find no ground to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal. The appeal is thus devoid of any merit. The same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. (RAJAN GUPTA) January 07, 2009 JUDGE 'rajpal'