IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.91/2025 Date of Decision: 18th November, 2025. Surekha Kumari and Ors. .....Petitioners Versus Rakhi and Ors. ….Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). The evidence, in the case at hand, insofar as the present petitioners is concerned, was closed vide order dated 26.06.2024, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Admittedly the said order has never been assailed by the present petitioners. Thereafter, an application for placing on record additional evidence was filed, which has been dismissed vide order dated 07.01.2025. It is this order, which has been impugned. 2. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal have filed an application for placing on record bank account detail of the deceased, which is duly certified under the Bankers Book of Evidence. By way of the same, he 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 intends to establish a recurring payment being paid to the deceased as a wage/salary by his employer. 3. In view thereof, learned counsel for the petitioners’ states that he is under instructions not to press this petition. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 18th November, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat)