Judgment J.R. Goyal, J.-This appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellant against the order dated 30.04.1994 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hindaun City in Misc. Civil Application for restoration of MAC Case No.187/1992, whereby the application for restoration has been dismissed treating it to be time barred. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant is a parda nassen illiterate lady, who sustained injuries in a motor accident and had filed a Claim Application before the Tribunal. She had engaged a Counsel practicing at Hindaun City, but subsequently when new Court was created at Mahua, the said Advocate shifted to that place and handed over the files to one Mr. Damodarlal Gupta, Advocate, who is based at Gangapur City. It was further contended that the appellant was never informed about the dismissal of her Claim Application on 17.07.1993 or that she was to appear on a particular date before the Tribunal at Hindaun City. It has been further contended that on 27.02.1994 when she contacted her Counsel, who had by then started practising at Mahua, she was informed that her file has been handed over to Mr. Damodarlal Gupta, Advocate, resident of Gangapur City. Thereafter, on contacting Mr. Damodarlal Gupta, Advocate, she was told that her Claim Application has been dismissed on 17.07.1993 in default. Soon thereafter, without wasting time, she filed the Misc. Application for restoration of her Claim Application. It has further been contended that her personal attendance was not required on 17.07.1993 since the case was fixed for summoning the respondents. It has also been contended that after the amendment in Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force with effect from 111.1994, there is no period of limitation for filing Claim Applications. Reliance has been placed on the Judgment of Honble the apex Court rendered in Dhannalal vs. D.P. Vijayvargiya & Ors, 1996 (1) ACC 603 (SC). 3. Learned Counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the Claim Application was dismissed in default on 17.07.1993 and the Misc. Application for restoration was filed on 27.02.1994, i.e. much after the expiry of the period of limitation. It has also been contended that no affidavit of the Counsel has been filed that he could not inform the claimant-appellant about the progress of her case. In this backdrop of the facts, learned Tribunal has rightly dismissed the Misc. Application for restoration. 4. It has also been contended that no affidavit of the Counsel has been filed that he could not inform the claimant-appellant about the progress of her case. In this backdrop of the facts, learned Tribunal has rightly dismissed the Misc. Application for restoration. 4. I have considered the rival contentions. The claimant-appellant, who is victim in a road accident, filed the Claim Application before the learned Tribunal and her Application was dismissed on 17.07.1993 on account of default. It appears from the impugned order that the appellant had also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condonation of the delay, alongwith her affidavit, assigning detailed reasons for the delay in filing the Misc. Application for restoration. 5. Compensation law is a beneficial legislation. The Parliament also, in its wisdom, realised the grave injustice and injury being caused to the victims of road accidents when their applications are rejected at the threshould on the ground of limitation and purposely deleted Sub-section (3) of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provided the period of limitation for filing a Claim Application. 6. Thus, keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances and also that the claimant-appellant is a parda nasheen lady, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where opportunity should be given to the victim claimant to seek redress on merits. 7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The learned Tribunal is directed to restore the Claim Application of the appellant and decide the same in accordance with law.