Punjab & Haryana HC allows MACT accused to file statement provided he 'plants 75 trees'

The Punjab and Haryana High Court (HC) has allowed a Nawanshahr man to file his written statement in a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) case for which the date of submission had lapsed. The Punjab and Haryana HC in its order subjected the man to plant 75 trees in the vicinity of his residence. 

Punjab and Haryana HC allows accused to file written statement in MACT case

Stating that the writ petition is allowed subject to costs, which are assessed at Rs 10,000, the bench of Justice Arun Monga said that by the imposition of costs, the petitioner shall plant 75 trees; deciduous and perennial in nature, of any variety viz, neem, Amla, Gulmohar and/or Alstonia, in the vicinity of his residence. He further said that the plantation shall be carried out under the supervision of the concerned district horticulture officer, who shall give a letter of proof to the MACT of having carried out the plantation as per the court orders. 

Remarking that in case the petitioner defaults in doing so, Arun Monga said that liberty is granted to the registry to place the matter before the Punjab and Haryana HC to report non-compliance. Proof of plantation is also furnished by the petitioner in the registry of this court, along with a supporting letter from the horticulture department, to be placed before this court upon receipt thereof, he added. 

This order comes as the Punjab and Haryana HC was hearing the plea off Amrik Singh, who through his counsel advocate Saurav Bhatia contended that he is the owner of the car involved in the fatal accident, and “in the absence of his defence, the irreparable loss would be caused to him qua the liability, which may be fastened on him for lack of his defence”

Informing that the petitioner is 90 per cent disabled and unable to walk, advocate Bhatia submitted that the petitioner can therefore not attend the court hearing in person. Stating that he is to necessarily depend on his counsel and others to follow up his interest, the advocate further submitted that the claim of the petition was listed for January 27, 2021.

Giving out further details, Bhatia informed that the petitioner caused his appearance through his counsel on February 12 2021, where he filed his power of attorney and sought time to file a written statement on the adjourned date March 9. He further said that on that date, the matter was adjourned to March 22, when the presiding officer was since on leave and there it was once again adjourned to April 16. 

In the interregnum, though the written statement, which is essentially on the same lines as was already filed in the earlier claim petition, had been re-prepared for fresh signatures and had been sent to the petitioner for the needful, he could not send it back to his counsel on time after signing the same. As a result, when his counsel sought further time to do the needful, the right of the petitioner to file a written statement was struck off.

After hearing this, Justice Monga held that the interest of justice would be met if subject to certain costs, one more opportunity is granted to file the written statement. He ordered that in the premise, a fresh written statement does not require much effort other than resigning by the petitioner. In particular premise, the order of the trial court is set aside with liberty to the petitioner to file his written statement on or before the date fixed before the trial court. In case needful is not done, no further opportunity shall be granted,” Monga added. 

(Image: Representative, Unsplash)