[2025:RJ-JP:3338] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 423/2025 1. Ramjilal Saini S/o Chhoturam Saini, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Dhani Goruwala, Tan Babai, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 2. Sushila Devi W/o Ramjilal Saini, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Dhani Goruwala, Tan Babai, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) ----Petitioners/Claimants Versus 1. Avinash Kumar Kundel S/o Shri Ummed Singh Kundel, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Khediya Gadali, Hadiya, Dausa At Present R/o 96, Prajapati Vihar Mansarovar, Jaipur (Driver Of Vehicle) 2. Yogesh Sadguru Kerkar S/o Sadguru Kerkar, R/o B-49, Shri Ganesh Temple Nayakwada, Pernem Mandrem Pernem Goa Northern Goa 403527 (Owner Of Vehicle) 3. United India Insurance Company Ltd., Registered And Head Office 24 Whites Road Channai 600014 Near Branch Office Station Road, Jhunjhunu (Raj.) Through Branch Manager (Insurer) ----Respondents/Non-Claimants For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Saini For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order 23/01/2025 This writ petition is directed against the order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Additional District Judge No.1 Khetri, Rajasthan, in claim case No.49/2022(49/2022): Ramjilal and Anr. Vs. Avinash Kumar Kundel and Ors. whereby, evidence of the petitioners/claimants (for brevity, “the petitioners”) has been closed. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioners filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [2025:RJ-JP:3338] (2 of 3) [CW-423/2025] (for brevity, “the Act of 1988”) claiming compensation on account of death of their son in a road accident. Therein, their evidence has been closed vide order impugned dated 28.11.2024 as they failed to produce the same despite availing sufficient opportunities. Eschewing merits of the case, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they may be granted one more opportunity to lead their entire evidence. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed, the order impugned dated 28.11.2024 be quashed and set aside and they may be granted one opportunity to lead their entire evidence. Heard. Considered. Taking into consideration the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the fact that the claim petition has been filed by them seeking compensation on account of death of their son in a road accident which occurred in the remote place of old Goa (Maharashtra) and keeping in view the beneficial nature of the legislation in favour of the claimants, and in the interest of justice, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition in following terms without issuing notice to the respondents to obviate further delay and not to enburden with unnecessary litigation expenses: 1. The order dated 28.11.2024 is quashed and set aside. 2. The petitioners are granted one opportunity to produce their entire evidence either on the next date fixed before the learned Tribunal or within a period of four [2025:RJ-JP:3338] (3 of 3) [CW-423/2025] weeks thereafter if the learned Tribunal so directs. 3. If the respondents feel aggrieved by this order, they are at liberty to move an application for its recalling. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J GAURAV/34