High CourtsDivision Bench(1981) 12 PAT CK 0002

Ramlal Sahu and Others vs Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 22 December 1981 · Citation: (1982) ACJ 405

HON’BLE JUDGES
U.C. Sharma, J · Satyeshwar Roy, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Appeal from Original Judgment No. 117 of 1977 (R)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 288 words
1.

The claimants in Claim Case No. 38 of 1976 have filed this appeal against the order dated March 28, 1977, by which the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal (the Tribunal) has refused to condone the delay in filing the claim application. On this ground, it has refused to entertain the claim application.

2.

On April 25, 1976, one Smt. Nuni Devi, while sitting near Naisarai Regional Hospital, was hit by a lorry and died due to the same. Her husband, sons and daughters filed the claim application on December 6, 1976. The limitation for filing the claim application expired on October 25, 1976. They, therefore, filed an application for condoning the delay. By the impugned order that has been refused.

3.

It was contended on behalf of the appellants that the Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay. The appellants led evidence in support of the fact that the husband (appellant No. 1) was ill from October 20, 1976, to December 6, 1976. On this ground alone they prayed for condonation of delay. It is an admitted fact that the deceased left behind two major sons, appellants Nos. 2 and 3. No explanation was given by the appellants as to what prevented them from filing the application. The Tribunal noticed this and refused the prayer of the appellants.

4.

It was submitted on behalf of the appellants that the appellants Nos. 2 and 3, being junior members of the family, could not have filed the application. There is no merit in this submission. They being sons of the deceased were competent to file the application within time. In view of these facts, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed, but without costs.