Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:HHC:10871 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO
No. : 779 of 2025 Decided on
: 06
th April, 2026 Mohammad Rafi & Another …Petitioners Versus Naval Kishore & Another …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Geeta Thakur, Advocate, vice Ms. Madhurika Sekhon Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Ashwani Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ishan Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) Petitioners have filed the present petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash the order dated 01.11.2025, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims TribunalI, Mandi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the MACT’), in Claim Petition No.118/2024, titled as Naval Kishore versus Mohammad Rafi & Others. 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:10871
2. By way of the order dated 01.11.2025, learned MACT has closed the right of the petitioners to file reply to the petition, filed by respondent No.1, Naval Kishore. 3. Parties to the lis are hereinafter referred to, in the same manner, in which, they were referred to, by the learned MACT. 4. Claimant Naval Kishore, has filed a petition before the learned MACT under Section 166 read with Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the M.V. Act. 5. In the said petition, present petitioners have been impleaded, as respondents No.1 and 2, being owner and driver of vehicle No.HP34E3297 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the offending vehicle’). 6. Despite opportunities granted to respondents No.1 and 2, by the learned MACT, they could not file the reply. Consequently, last opportunity was granted and when they have failed to file the reply, despite last opportunity, their right to file the reply to the petition, as well as, to the
3 2026:HHC:10871 application, has been ordered to be closed, vide order dated
01.11.2025. 7. Respondents No.1 and 2, are now seeking indulgence of this Court to grant them one opportunity to file reply, on the ground that both of them are residents of Ludhiana (Punjab)and real brother of petitioner No.1 has expired and due to this fact, they could not contact their counsel. Hence, order has been passed by the learned MACT. 8.
The prayer, so made, in this application, has been opposed by the learned counsel for the claimants that despite last opportunity granted, they have failed to file the reply to the petition, as well as, to the application. 9. The proceedings, under the M.V. Act, are summary in nature, where, the liability of the tortfeaser is to be fixed, on the principle of preponderance of probability, however, respondents No.1 and 2, who are owner and driver of the offending vehicle are entitled to file reply to bring on record the material facts, which would be necessary to adjudicate the matter, in an effective manner. 4 2026:HHC:10871
10. From the perusal of the order dated 01.11.2025, it is crystal clear that despite various opportunities granted to respondents No.1 and 2, they could not file reply, as such, no fault can be found in the order passed by the learned MACT. However, considering the true import of the procedural law, in the light of the stand taken by respondents No.1 and 2, this Court is of the view that at least one opportunity is required to be given to them, just to explain their case. 11. Consequently, the petition is allowed, by allowing respondents No.1 and 2 to file reply, within a week from the date of appearance before the learned MACT, that too, subject to cost of Rs.20,000/, to be paid to claimant Naval Kishore. 12. Parties to the lis are directed to appear before the learned MACTI, Mandi, on 6th May, 2026. On that day, respondents No.1 and 2 (petitioners herein) will tender cost and thereafter, they will file the reply to the petition, on or before 13.05.2026. 13. It is made clear that in case, respondents No.1 and 2 (petitioners herein) fail to file reply, within the time granted
5 2026:HHC:10871 by this Court, no further opportunity shall be given to them to file reply. 14. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
( Virender Singh ) April 06, 2026( ps ) Judge