SEEMA DEVI Vs. PANKAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellants who are the legal representatives of the deceased Deepak impugns the judgment dated 01.09.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby the Claim Petition filed by them was dismissed on the ground that the Appellants failed to prove any negligence on the part of the driver of the two wheeler No. DL- 8SS-2392, the First Respondent with which the accident occurred.

(2.) DURING inquiry before the Claims Tribunal, the Appellants examined PW-2 Lalit Kumar, a neighbour of the deceased, who claimed himself to be an eye witness to the accident. The Claims Tribunal rejected his testimony on the ground that he was a planted witness. It took the view that the negligence on the part of the first Respondent was not proved.

(3.) I would agree with the conclusion reached by the Claims Tribunal except that filing of the criminal case was sufficient to prove deceased's negligence. Dehors the criminal case a Claimant can prove the negligence in the Civil Court or the Claims Tribunal.