1993 JTR(SC) 434
1994 Supp2 SCC 507
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Kuldip Singh : N.P.Singh
Ram Kishan
Versus
U.P.State Roadways Transport Corporation
Case No. : 2441 of 1993
Date of Decision : 4/23/93
Delay in filing a motor accident compensation claim may be condoned if the claimants were under extreme shock and bereavement, ensuring the case is decided on its merits rather than dismissed on technical grounds of limitation.
Act
Referred
:LIMITATION ACT
: S.5
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT: S.110(a)(3)
(A) Motor Accident Claims - Condonation of delay - Application for compensation filed beyond the limitation period - Claimants cited extreme bereavement and incorrect legal advice as reasons for delay - Lower courts dismissed the application as time-barred - In cases where claimants are labouring under extreme shock, the delay should be condoned to allow the claim to be decided on merits. (Para 4)
Facts of the case:
Following the death of a son in a motor accident involving a state-run bus, the parents filed an application for compensation along with a prayer for condonation of delay. The application was filed after the conclusion of the criminal trial against the driver. The tribunal rejected the prayer for condonation of delay and dismissed the application as time-barred, a decision subsequently upheld by the High Court.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that while the explanation provided for the delay was not entirely convincing, the extreme shock and bereavement experienced by the parents justified the condonation of the delay.
Issues: Whether the delay in filing the application for compensation should be condoned given the circumstances of extreme shock and bereavement suffered by the claimants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in circumstances involving extreme shock and bereavement, the delay in filing a compensation claim should be condoned to ensure that the case is decided on its merits rather than being dismissed on technical grounds of limitation.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Facts of the case:
Following the death of a son in a motor accident involving a state-run bus, the parents filed an application for compensation along with a prayer for condonation of delay. The application was filed after the conclusion of the criminal trial against the driver. The tribunal rejected the prayer for condonation of delay and dismissed the application as time-barred, a decision subsequently upheld by the High Court.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that while the explanation provided for the delay was not entirely convincing, the extreme shock and bereavement experienced by the parents justified the condonation of the delay.
Issues: Whether the delay in filing the application for compensation should be condoned given the circumstances of extreme shock and bereavement suffered by the claimants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in circumstances involving extreme shock and bereavement, the delay in filing a compensation claim should be condoned to ensure that the case is decided on its merits rather than being dismissed on technical grounds of limitation.
Result: Appeal allowed.
(1) SPECIAL leave granted.
(2) RAM Kishan and his wife Prabhawati are the appellants before us. Their son Hem Chand died as a result of accident on 2/03/1974. The boy was run over by bus No. UTB-109 belonging to U.P. State Roadways Transport Corporation. It was being driven by one Bhagwat Prasad Misra. The driver was prosecuted under S. 279/304-A Indian Penal Code and was convicted by the court. The appellants filed an application for compensation along with an application for condonation of delay before the Motor Accident Claims tribunal, Jaunpur in the year 1977. By its order dated 4/08/1978 the tribunal rejected the prayer for condonation of delay and dismissed the application as time-barred. The first appeal filed by the appellants before the High court was dismissed on 7/12/1981.
(3) APPELLANT Ram Kishan, in support of the application for condonation of delay before the tribunal, stated that his young son having died in the accident, he was deeply bereaved and was not in his senses. He further stated that he did not know the court procedure and as such he consulted one Ram Lakhan Upadhyaya, advocate who advised him that an application for compensation before the Motor Accident Claims tribunal could be filed after the decision in the criminal trial against the accused-driver. The criminal trial concluded on 28/11/1977 and thereafter he filed the application before the Motor Accident Claims tribunal in December 1977.
(4) ALTHOUGH the story put forward by the appellants, for not filing the application for compensation within the period of limitation, does not sound convincing but keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, especially the extreme shock under which the appellants were labouring, we are of the view that the Motor Accident Claims tribunal should have condoned the delay and decided the claim on merits.
(5) WE allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the tribunal and of the High court, condone the delay in filing the application for compensation before the Motor Accident Claims tribunal, Jaunpur and remand the case to the Tribunal for decision on merits after hearing the parties in accordance with law. The tribunal shall decide the application expeditiously and preferably within six months from the date of the receipt of this order. No costs.