N D M C Vs. MOHD YUSUF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the present appeal, counsel seeks to challenge the impugned award dated 29. 05. 2003 primarily on two grounds. The first ground taken by the appellant is that the deceased was a ragpicker and died while entering in garbage dhalao. The second ground taken by the appellant is that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the said garbage disposal van and no negligence has even been proved on record as merely an FIR was registered against the appellant.

(2.) BEFORE dealing with the contentions of the appellant, it would be appropriate to give brief facts of the present case as under: on 5. 2. 98 at 10. 30 A. M. the deceased Mohd Yasin @ Tinku met with a tragic end as the heavy lid of the garbage dumping carrier no. DL IG 6548 fell upon him due to the rashness and negligence of the driver of the said carrier. Counsel for the appellant contends that mere registration of FIR is not enough to prove the negligence on the part of the driver of the said vehicle. Counsel also contends that the deceased himself was a wrong doer as he could not have picked the garbage from the Garbage dhalao as the dhalao area is the forbidden area and nobody without the authority of the NDMC is allowed to enter in the said garbage dumping area.

(3.) ON the other hand Mr. Islam Khan, counsel for the respondent contends that the claim petition which was initially filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was converted into Section 163-A of M. V. Act. Counsel thus contends that it was enough for the respondent to prove the use of the vehicle in question which led to causing death of Mr. Mohd Yasin. Counsel further contends that under the Motor Vehicles Act, registration of FIR against the offending vehicle is a sufficient proof so as to show the involvement of the said vehicle in causing the accident.