FAO No.116 of 2009 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... FAO No.116 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on : August 03, 2009 Neelam Devi @ Neelam Kumari, etc. ... Appellants VERSUS Balwant Singh etc. ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Rajeev Dev Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.K.S.Mangat, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 2(A). Ms.Vandana Malhotra, Advocate for the Insurance Company – respondent No.3. A.N.JINDAL, J.- Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurdaspur, vide its award dated 4.6.2008 dismissed the claim petition, preferred by the claimants – appellants (herein referred as the `claimants'). The grievance of the claimants is that no opportunity was afforded to them to lead evidence and the petition was dismissed for want of evidence. Heard. After the framing of the issues on 29.11.2006, the case was FAO No.116 of 2009 (O&M) [ 2 ] fixed for 21.3.2007 for evidence. On that day, no evidence was present and the case was adjourned to 13.6.2007, on which date the claimants filed affidavit of PW Avtar Singh, but he could not be cross-examined. Later on also, he did not appear for cross-examination. It has been observed by the Tribunal that despite various opportunities given to the claimants, the aforesaid witness was not produced for cross-examination and no other witness was examined. In this regard, it may be observed that procuring the presence of a witness for cross-examination, is the duty of the Court and this liability cannot be fastened upon the parties, unless the claimant is guilty of continuous negligence and has not shifted the obligation by depositing the list of witnesses, necessary process fee for summoning the witnesses. The Tribunal appears to have not summoned the witness according to the procedure as provided under law. In any case, the party having genuine and bonafide rights, coming to the Court for adjudication, could not be deprived to establish its rights for little negligence on its part. However, delay, if any, could be compensated with costs. In the circumstances, the petition is accepted, the impugned order dated 4.6.2008 is set aside and it is directed that the claimants would be allowed to lead their evidence, subject to payment of Rs.3000/- as costs. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 3.9.2009. August 03, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE