CRP/6831/2026 of CHANDRALEKHA Vs P. Manickam and Co on 29 October 2026

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner, seeking restoration of the claim petition, which was dismissed for default.

2. The petitioner herein filed a claim petition in MCOP No.261 of 2009 seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by her in a road accident that had taken place on 01.01.2009. It is seen from the typed set of papers that the said claim petition was dismissed for default on 21.07.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application to restore the claim petition along with a petition to condone the delay of 2599 days in filing the restoration petition. The condone delay petition was dismissed by the Tribunal and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the counsel on record for the petitioner before the Tribunal, namely Mr.Socreties, has not informed the stage of the claim petition for several years and hence, there was a delay in filing petition to restore the claim petition, which was dismissed for default.

CRP No. 6831 of 2026

4. A perusal of the typed set of papers would indicate that the respondents in the claim petition were set exparte and the matter was posted for recording exparte evidence. The petitioner failed to lead exparte evidence nearly for three years and ultimately the OP was dismissed for default. The dismissal order was passed on 21.07.2016. The instant application seeking restoration of the OP along with condone delay petition was filed only on 11.04.2023. In the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition, it was stated that the counsel on record for the petitioner before the Tribunal, namely Socreties passed away and the fact of death came to the knowledge of the petitioner only 15 days prior to filing of the instant applications.

5. It is seen from the records that the counsel on record passed away only on 26.09.2018, however the main OP was dismissed for default as early as on 21.07.2016 for the failure of the petitioner to lead exparte evidence for nearly 3 years. Therefore, it is clear that the main O.P. was dismissed even during the life time of the counsel on record. From the averments found the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition, it is clear that the petitioner failed to contact her counsel or enquire about the status of the case for nearly 7 years from the year 2016 to 2023. The petitioner has not given any valid reason for her inaction for nearly 7 years. The Tribunal rightly appreciated the said

CRP No. 6831 of 2026 position and dismissed the condone delay petition. Therefore, I do not find any error in the impugned order passed by the Claims Tribunal.

6. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 29-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MST To The Subordinate Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Poonamallee.

CRP No. 6831 of 2026 S.SOUNTHAR, J. MST CRP No. 6831 of 2026 29-10-2026