FAO No.3333 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3333 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision. 01.02.2011 Bhup Singh son of Surajbhan resident of village Bighopur, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mohindergarh ......Appellant Versus Arvind Kumar son of Lal Chand and others .....Respondents 2. FAO No.3334 of 2010 (O&M) Ajit Singh son of Shiv Kumar resident of village Bighopur, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mohindergarh ......Appellant Versus Arvind Kumar son of Lal Chand and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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.(ORAL) 1. Both the appeals arise out of dismissal of the claim for compensation in an alleged motor accident. The complaint was that the accident had taken place when the claimants were travelling in a scooter in a collision with motor cycle. The FIR had been lodged six months later when it was stated by one of the claimants that he had been very busy and therefore, could not make a complaint earlier. There was no accident report or wound certificate to show that the injuries which the claimants were complaining of had resulted only out of an motor accident. The driver of the motor cycle, who was arrayed as 1st respondent, had come to court to deny the involvement of his FAO No.3333 of 2010 (O&M) -2- vehicle in the accident. With the explanation for non-filing of FIR being so flimsy and the absence of any medico-legal report to show that the injury suffered to the claimants is on account of motor accident, which had taken place on that day, the Tribunal had dismissed it. 2. I cannot find any reason to differ with the view already taken by the Tribunal. The orders of dismissal are maintained and the appeals are dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 01, 2011 Pankaj*