Civil Revision No. 3256 of 2011 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 3256 of 2011 Date of decision: 17.05.2011 Smt. Amarjeet and others ......Petitioners Versus Jitender Singh and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.J.S. Cooner, Advocate, for the petitioners-claimants. **** SABINA, J. Petitioners-claimants have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act 1988, claiming compensation on account of death of Rajinder Pal Singh in a motor vehicle accident. Vide impugned order (Annexpure P-1) the evidence of the petitioners has been closed and the case was adjourned for documentary evidence of the claimants, if any, and for respondents evidence for 29.04.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioners-claimants has submitted that the petitioners had deposited the requisite diet money for summoning the witnesses on 15.02.2011. However, the said witnesses have not been summoned by the Tribunal. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. A perusal of application dated 10.02.2011 (Annexure P-2) reveals that the petitioners had moved an application for summoning Civil Revision No. 3256 of 2011 -2- the witnesses on deposit of requisite fee and expenses. Vide order dated 10.02.2011 the Tribunal directed the petitioners to deposit Rs.900/- towards diet money and expenses and the witnesses were also ordered to be summoned. In pursuance of the said order, the petitioners deposited Rs.900/- on 15.02.2011. Thus, the petitioners had performed their duty by depositing the requisite fee to summon the witnesses. However, the witnesses have not been summoned by the Tribunal. In these circumstances, the petitioners could not be made to suffer for no fault of theirs. The Tribunal should have summoned the witnesses, regarding whom requisite diet money had been deposited by the petitioners, in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 19.04.2011, whereby the evidence of the petitioners was closed, is set aside. The Tribunal is directed to summon the witnesses mentioned in Annexure P-2 and proceed further with the case in accordance with law. (SABINA) JUDGE May 17 , 2011 Jyoti 1