Bholi v. Bablu And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 21.12.2023 Bholi . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

Bablu Singh and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Saleem Ahmed, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) CM-23437-CII-2023 I.

This is an application filed under Section 151 CPC, for placing on record the zimni orders as Annexure A-3 (zimni orders from 10.02.2020 to 20.10.2023).

II.

Allowed as prayed for. Zimni orders as Annexure A-3, are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

CM stands disposed of.

CR-5365-2023 1.

By way of present revision petition, petitioner - Bholi (petitioner/claimant No.1), has challenged the order dated 31.10.2022 (Annexure P-2) (in MACP/564/2017), passed by Ld. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad (for brevity, 'Ld. Tribunal'), whereby, evidence of the petitioner has been closed.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner (petitioner/claimant No.1) submits that issues were framed by the Ld. Tribunal, during the peak of

pandemic COVID-19 i.e. on 25.08.2021. Thereafter, for one reason or the other, claim petition kept on adjourning. To show the reasons of adjournment, counsel refers to the zimni orders, which have been taken on record as Annexure A-3, vide separate order of even date passed in CM23437-CII-2023. 3.

He further submits that petitioner is a widow. She is resident of Bijnor (Uttar Pradesh), and is not having any connection with the area of Faridabad. Rather, there is no one known to her, who could have done follow up of the proceedings of trial. On account of the accident in question, she has already lost her husband. Because of her compelling circumstances, no material evidence could be led by her, in the claim petition filed in the year 2017 before the Ld. MACT, Faridabad. Petitioner is stated to be an illiterate and rustic villager. Thus, counsel prays for taking a lenient view by granting two more effective opportunities to allow the petitioner to lead her evidence in the claim petition.

4.

Therefore, counsel submits that by taking a lenient view, if two effective opportunities are granted to the petitioner (petitioner/claimant No.1) to lead her evidence, same would be sufficient opportunity for her. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant No.1, and perused the relevant material on record.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE December 21, 2023 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No