IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1067 of 1987 (O&M) Date of decision:01.09.2010 Devkinandan Bangur and others ....Appellants versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: None for the appellants. Mr. Kunal Garg, AAG, Haryana. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J. 1. The case is of the year 1987 and it purports to contain a challenge to the dismissal of the claim petition filed seeking for compensation for a death in accident alleged to have taken place on 04.06.1984. The Tribunal held that the claim petition was barred by limitation, at a time when the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 provided for a clause for limitation. The Tribunal dismissed it not only on the issue of limitation but also held the negligence had not been proved. 2. It appears that the case had been treated as in some way connected to LPA No.40 of 1994. The said appeal appears to have been dismissed on 29.11.2007 when the State failed to comply with the order of service to respondents by substituted service. The relevance of the FAO No.1067 of 1987 (O&M) - 2 - case in LPA itself was not discernible from the records. The counsel for the Government produces a report of the Additional Transport Commissioner, K.S. Gill naming some officers as responsible for the dismissal of LPA. When asked what was the relevance of those records, the counsel Shri Kunal Garg, is unable to explain. There is no representation for the appellants. I see no point for keeping the case on file which has been pending from the year 1987 when neither party is interested in prosecuting the case with the concern that it deserves. 3 The appeal is dismissed for default of non-prosecution. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 01 .09.2010 sanjeev