Rajesh Kumar vs Sudesh Kaur And Ors

CR-7437-2024 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
132-2 CR-7437-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 28.10.2026
Rajesh Kumar ....Petitioner
Vs.
Sudesh Kaur and others ....Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER
Present: Mr. Munish Behl, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Sushma Verma Syal, Advocate
for respondents No.1 and 2.
*
HARSH BUNGER J.
The present civil revision petition has been filed, under Article
227 of the Constitution of India, for setting aside the order dated 19.10.2024
(Annexure P-10) passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Ambala (in short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby an application under Order 7 Rule
11 read with Section 151 CPC, filed by the petitioner seeking rejection of the
plaint has been dismissed.
2. Briefly, respondents No. 1 and 2 herein/claimants filed a claim
petition (MACP No. 40 of 2018) under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 (in short, 'the 1988 Act'), seeking compensation on account of
death of their son Makhan Kumar in a motor vehicular accident on
23.11.2017.
ANKIT
2026.11.05 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Chandigarh

CR-7437-2024 (O&M) -2-
2.1 A perusal of the claim petition (Annexure P-1) would show that
in column No. 10 thereof, it was specifically mentioned that the
deceased-Makhan Kumar was driver of motorcycle bearing registration
No. PB-11CG-1871 and in column No. 14, the details of the vehicles
involved in the accident are mentioned as under:
“Tata Indica Car no.HR36-M-6209 (Offending car) and Motor
cycle bearing No.PB-11CG-1871”
2.2 Even in column No. 20, the detail of the motorcycle is
mentioned as motorcycle bearing No. PB-11CG-1871. Still further, in
column No. 9 of the claim petition, reference has been made to case FIR
No. 416 dated 24.11.2017 registered under Sections 279, 304-A IPC
registered at Police Station Baldev Nagar.
2.3 A perusal of the claim petition (Annexure P-1) would further
show that in column No. 24 thereof, the following averment has been made:
“ 24) Cause of accident, with brief description:
That on 23-11-2017, the claimant no.2 and the
deceased-Makhan Kumar were going from Parshuram Chowk,
Naraingarh to their house on motor cycle bearing
no.HR04-D-6248. The claimant no.2 Amrit Lal (father of the
deceased) was driving the motor cycle bearing
no.HR04-D-6248 while the deceased-Makhan Kumar was
pillon rider on the said motor cycle. The claimant no.2 Amrit
Lal was driving the motor cycle no.HR04D-6248 in a moderate
speed by observing the traffic rules and when at about
09:10A.M. they reached near General Hospital, Naraingarh,
(Ambala) Police Station Naraingarh, then one motor cycle
no.HR04D-0645 which was being driven by the respondent
ANKIT
2026.11.05 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Chandigarh

CR-7437-2024 (O&M) -3-
no.1 in a rash and negligent manner came from the side of
General Hospital Naraingarh i.e. opposite side came and
struck his motor cycle no.HR04D-0645 in the motor cycle of
the deceased and due to that impact the deceased-Makhan
Kumar and the claimant no.2-Amrit Lal fell down on the road
from motor cycle no.HR04D-6248 and the deceased-Makhan
Kumar suffered grevious injuries on his body i.e. on head, nose,
mouth, ear etc.. The respondent no.1 ran away from the spot
after leaving his motor cycle bearing no.HR04D-0645.
Thereafter, the deceased-Makhan Kumar was taken to the
General hospital, Naraingarh, but as the condition of Makhan
Kumar was very serious, so doctors of General Hospital,
Naraingarh referred him to P.G.I., Chandigarh. Thereafter, on
the same day, he was taken to PGI, Chandigarh, where
treatment of the deceased-Makhan Kumar was started, but
deceased-Makhan Kumar died at P.G.I., Chandigarh on 22-12-
2017 due to the injuries caused in the accident. The FIR
No.416 dated 24-11-2017, U/S 279, 304-A IPC, PS Baldev
Nagar was registered on the statement of claimant no.2. The
postmortem of the deceased-Makhan Kumar was conducted at
GMCH, Sector-32, Chandigarh on 24-11-2017.
xxx xxx xxx”
2.4 In the aforesaid claim petition (Annexure P-1), the present
petitioner (Rajesh Kumar) has been impleaded as respondent No. 2, being
owner of Tata Indica car bearing No. HR36-M-6209.
3. The present petitioner appeared in the aforesaid claim petition
and filed his written statement, inter alia , stating that he had already sold the
vehicle in question to Sh. Amit Kumar son of Sh. Karan Singh, resident of
VPO Jathlana, District Yamunanagar on 05.06.2013, and that he had handed
ANKIT
2026.11.05 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Chandigarh

CR-7437-2024 (O&M) -4-
over the affidavit for transfer of the car in question in the name of Amit
Kumar along with Form Nos. 29 and 30, and has also handed over the ‘No
Objection Certificate’ dated 03.06.2013 issued in the name of
RTO, Jagadhri by SDM-cum-Registering Authority (MV), Rewari. It was
further stated that he had handed over the car in question to Amit Kumar and
when he learnt that Amit Kumar has not got the car transferred in his name,
he got issued a legal notice dated 09.01.2018 through his counsel and further
reported the matter to the Police Post, Sector 3, Model Town, Rewari on
10.01.2018. It was maintained that he has no concern with the car in
question since 05.06.2013.
4. Even the driver of the car bearing No. HR36-M-6209 namely
Varun Sehdev, filed his separate written statement, inter alia , claiming that
no accident ever took place with the car bearing No. HR36-M-6209 as
alleged by the claimants.
5. It further transpires that an application being filed by the
present petitioner for impleading Amit Kumar as a party to the claim petition
was allowed by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 25.10.2018
(Annexure P-5) and Amit Kumar was impleaded as party “respondent No. 3”
in the claim petition.
6. It appears that during the pendency of proceedings before the
learned Tribunal, the respondents No. 1 and 2 herein/claimants filed an
application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC, seeking
amendment of para/column No. 24 of the claim petition as the contents
thereof were at variance from the actual facts stated in earlier part of the
ANKIT
2026.11.05 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Chandigarh

CR-7437-2024 (O&M) -5-
claim petition as well as the FIR in relation to the accident, inasmuch as that
the details of the vehicles involved in accident were wrongly mentioned in
para/column No.24 due to typographical error/mistake.
7. During the pendency of the aforesaid application for
amendment of the plaint/claim petition, the present petitioner filed an
application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 151 CPC, seeking
rejection of the plaint primarily on the basis of averments made in
para/column No.24 of claim petition by stating that he has no connection
with the offending vehicle i.e. motorcycle bearing No. HR04-D-0645.
7.1 The aforesaid application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was
opposed by respondents No. 1 and 2 herein/claimants.
8. The learned Tribunal vide order dated 19.10.2024 allowed the
amendment application filed by the claimants, and vide separate order of the
same date i.e. 19.10.2024 (Annexure P-10), dismissed the application under
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
9. Feeling dissatisfied with the order dated 19.10.2024
(Annexure P-10) dismissing application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, the
petitioner has filed the present revision petition before this Court.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and
perused the paperbook with their able assistance.
11. The aforementioned facts are not disputed before this Court.
12. It is apparent from the aforementioned facts that the petitioner
filed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 151 CPC,
seeking rejection of the claim petition at the stage when respondents No. 1
ANKIT
2026.11.05 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Chandigarh

CR-7437-2024 (O&M) -6-
and 2/claimants filed their application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, seeking
amendment of para 24 of the claim petition, as the contents thereof were at
variance with the factual position emanating from the FIR as well as para
Nos. 1 to 20 of the claim petition.
12.1 It appears that the petitioner framed his application under Order
7 Rule 11 CPC primarily on the basis of the averments contained in the
unamended claim petition especially para/column No.24 thereof, which
stated that the accident took place with a motorcycle bearing No. HR04-
D-0645. Evidently, the offending vehicle in the FIR as well as in
paras/columns No. 1 to 20 of the claim petition is clearly mentioned as Tata
Indica car bearing No. HR-36-M-6209.
12.2 It is also interesting to note that in respect of the offending car
i.e. Tata Indica bearing registration No. HR36-M-6209, it is the stand of the
petitioner that he has already sold the said car to one Sh. Amit Kumar on
05.06.2013 and that he has no concern with the said car in question since
05.06.2013, therefore, there is no cause of action against the petitioner.
However, as per petitioner’s own stand, Sh. Amit Kumar had not got the
vehicle transferred in his name.
13. In my considered view, the issue as regards ownership of the
offending vehicle as well as the liability to pay compensation would be
considered by learned Tribunal after parties lead their respective evidence.
14. The averments contained in the claim petition clearly states a
cause of action against the petitioner, therefore, the learned Tribunal below
ANKIT
2026.11.05 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Chandigarh

CR-7437-2024 (O&M) -7-
was justified in dismissing the application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with
Section 151 CPC filed by the petitioner.
15. Resultantly, the present civil revision petition fails and the same
is accordingly, dismissed .
16. All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.
(HARSH BUNGER)
28.10.2026 JUDGE
Ankit
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
ANKIT
2026.11.05 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Chandigarh