MOHAMMED KHIZARULLA Vs. M. BABA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeal is by the claimants challenging the finding of the Tribunal saddling liability on the owner and also on the quantum of compensation awarded on the ground that it is on the lower side. It is stated, on 30.7.2004, deceased Shaik Khamarujjamma alias Kharru along with his mother had been to Penakonda for selling beedi in whole sale and also retail in the Urs fair.

(2.) Heard the counsel representing the parties.

(3.) The contention of the appellants' counsel is, respondent have not cross-examined the witnesses in proof of their contention denying the averments made in the petition as such, it is conclusive proof that the accident occurred while the deceased was travelling along with the goods. Per contra, counsel for the respondent insurer submitted, Ex. P2 document got exhibited by the claimants themselves prove that the mother of the deceased as well as the deceased were travelling in the goods van. Nothing was whispered it was 'along with the goods' and in the absence of any material on record, rightly the Tribunal held that the deceased was not travelling with the goods and accordingly, fastened liability on the owner of the goods in question. Though the insurer has not cross-examined the evidence of the claimant/mother but the fact remains, in the absence of any material evidence to support the claim of the claimant that both of them were travelling along with the goods, mere oral testimony would not be sufficient when contra evidence is there.