NARASAMMA Vs. MANJUNATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though this matter is listed for admission today, with the consent of both the learned counsel it is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The parties are referred to as per their original rankings before the Tribunal to avoid confusion and for the convenience of the Court.

(3.) The main contention of the learned counsel for the claimant is that the Tribunal committed an error in dismissing the claim petition without looking into the material available on record. The counsel also would submit that the Tribunal committed an error in dismissing the claim petition even though the claimant examined herself as P.W.1 and produced the documents as Exs.P1 to P10 and though the respondent No.2 denied the occurrence of the accident and involvement of auto rickshaw, not placed any material before the Court. It is also contended that the observation made by the Tribunal that only to support the claimant, the respondent No.1 was placed exparte is erroneous. The counsel also would submit that, when the injured was taken to the hospital, he was given treatment and in terms of Ex.P10-outpatient slip, it is mentioned as history of RTA on 24/3/2012 and inspite of it, the Tribunal committed an error in dismissing the claim petition.