Dismissed¶¶17

Suman and Ors. v. Neeraj and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Aug 2025FAO/1811/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suman and others v. Neeraj and others; FAO-1811-2021 (O&M); High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; Justice Nidhi Gupta (oral order); decided 05.08.2025; dismissal of claimants' appeal for non-prosecution; motor accident compensation appeal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; challenge to MACT Narnaul award dated 23.05.2019 (MACT Case No. 101 of 2018) granting Rs. 30,94,000/- to widow, minor son and parents of deceased-Ashok Kumar; notice not issued; appellants un-represented since inception; 188-day delay; pending applications disposed of.

What did the court decide?

None; the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution and pending application(s), if any, stood disposed of. ¶¶17

Suman and Ors. Vs Neeraj and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

FAO-1811-2021 (O&M) -1-

¶2

IN THE HI G H COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

107 FA O -1811-2021 (O&M) Dat e of Decision: 05.08.2025

Suman an d others

.… Appellants

Versus

Neeraj an d others .... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶9

Present: - None.

¶10

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶11

Challenge in the present app e al filed by the claimants is to the Awar d dated 23.05.2019 passed b y the learned Motor Accident Claims Tr i bunal, Narnaul, whereby the claim petition bearing MACT Case No. 1 01 of 2018 dated 23.05.2019, f iled by the appellant-claimants under Sec t ion 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was partly allowed and ₹30,9 4 ,000/- was awarded as compen s ation to the appellants. The 04 claimants are the widow, minor son a n d parents of deceased-Ashok Kumar, w h o was stated to be 32 years old a t the time of accident.

¶12

The matter pertains to the y e ar 2021. Perusal of the record reveals th a t notice in the present appeal is yet to be issued. Further, since the incept i on, the appellants have gone un-represented. Moreover, the present ap p eal has been filed with a delay o f 188 days.

¶13

A bare reading of the above facts shows that the appellants have exhi b ited an utterly casual attitude in their pursuit of the present litigation. I t is to be appreciated that ve r y valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording op p ortunities to the appellants in

¶14

RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.06 18:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶15

FAO-1811-2021 (O&M) -2-

¶16

the interes t of justice. On the other hand, the appellants have adopted an utterly cas u al and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellants nor their counsel are seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this C ourt is left with no other optio n except to dismiss the same for non-prose c ution.

¶17

Ordered accordingly.

¶18

Pending application(s), if any , shall also stand disposed of.

¶19

05.08.2025 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE

¶20

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶21

RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.06 18:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Suman and Ors. v. Neeraj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman and Ors. v. Neeraj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Imarati Vs Mahabir Singh and Ors.

Kalindi Harnal and Another Vs Sushant Sharma and Another

Jaspreet Singh and Others Vs Nishant Kumar Yadav Land Acquisition Collector and Another

Punjab National Bank Vs Indraj

Vijender Malik and Others Vs Pardeep Kumar and Another

Priya Chaudhary Vs Chander Bhan Singh and Another