N RAJANNA Vs. NAGAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 2nd respondent in MVC 11/2000 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), JMFC, Chinthamani is the appellant.

(2.) FACTS necessary for the consideration of the appeal are as under: It is the case of one Sri. Narayanaswamy, the claimant in the claim application that he was moving in a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-07 H 1327 as a pillion rider on 11.1.1998, it was driven by 2nd respondent, while so, the rider of the Hero-Honda bearing registration No.CAY 3139 driven by 1st respondent has dashed, it resulted in road traffic accident. So, prays for compensation of Rs.50,000/-.

(3.) LEARNED advocate for the 2nd respondent substantiates his clients case with the following submission: In the facts of the case though amendment is incorporated to the claim application, no evidence is placed by the petitioner to probabilise and prove that Narayanaswamy has died due to the injuries suffered in the road traffic accident. Secondly Narayanaswamy during his lifetime admits that 2nd respondent has driven the vehicle slowly and cautiously, while so, the learned member of the Tribunal has erroneously fastened the liability on the 2nd respondent.