IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4759 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:16.03.2011 Pataso Devi and others ....Appellants versus Pawan Kumar and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, Advocate, for the appellants. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. Delay condoned. 2. The application by the appellant for prosecution of the case under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act was dismissed on the ground that the proved income, filed on record, showed that deceased's income was more than Rs.40,000/-. The counsel states that he is prepared to scale down his income to less than Rs.40,000/-. It is not a matter of concession for a claimant to do. It is, on the other hand, a matter of proof which is already available on record on the basis of which, the claimant could not have resorted to an application under Section 163-A. The rejection of the plea by the claimant for prosecution FAO No.4759 of 2009 (O&M) - 2 - of the case under Section 163-A was, therefore, justified. I find no reason to differ with the view. The appeal is dismissed., (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 16.03.2011 sanjeev