RAJIA KHATOON Vs. SURAJ CHOPRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant impugns a judgment dated 17.05.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) whereby while holding that the Appellant suffered damages to the extent of Rs.1,53,600/- it granted a compensation of Rs.56,100/-, that is, to the extent of 30% on the ground that the driver of the scooter contributed in the accident to the extent of 70%.

(2.) THERE is twin challenge to the judgment. First, it is urged that there was no negligence on the part of the two-wheeler driver. Even if it is so, it was a case of composite negligence and the Appellant could recover compensation from either one of the tortfeasors. Second, that no interest was awarded to the Appellant.

(3.) NOT only this, the First Respondent pleaded guilty to the offence under Section 279 and compounded the offence under Section 338 IPC. It is note-worthy that the front portion of the two-wheeler on which the Appellant was travelling as a pillion rider also broke down on account of the forceful impact. It is very strange that the Claims Tribunal instead of appreciating the evidence of the injured, which largely remained unchallenged and the involvement of the car (in question) in the accident which was not in dispute went on to observe that the colour of the car involved in the accident was not given by the Appellant. It went on to add that the suspension of the two-wheeler must have broken on account of lack of proper maintenance. The conclusions reached by the Claims Tribunal were not based on any evidence. The Claims Tribunal's finding that there was contributory negligence to the extent of 70% on the part of the scooter driver is without any evidence and is perverse.