PREM DEVI Vs. JAGDISH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18.07.2000 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a Claim Petition preferred under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) was dismissed on the ground that the negligence on the part of the First Respondent, driver of the bus No.DEP-7727 was not established.

(2.) AT the time of filing of the Appeal, a submission was made by the learned counsel for the Appellants that they (the Appellants) would move an application for additional evidence so as to examine the Investigating Officer (IO) and to produce some documents to show the circumstantial evidence regarding the negligence of the driver (the First Respondent). No such application was moved. At the time of hearing of the Appeal, a statement was made by the learned counsel for the Appellants that the Appeal may be converted to one under Section 163-A of the Act and the compensation may be awarded on the basis of the structured formula.

(3.) IT is well settled that the Appeal is in continuation of the Suit. (Bay Berry Apartments (P) Ltd. & Anr. v. Shobha & Ors., (2006) 13 SCC 737 and Rachakonda Narayana v. Ponthala Parvathamma & Anr. (2001) 8 SCC 173).