UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. GEETABEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The First Appeal is by the Insurance Company challenging the judgment dtd. 19/7/2006 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No.10, Ahmedabad in M.A.C.P. No.225 of 2002. While the Cross Objection No.164 of 2009 is by the claimants praying for enhancement of the compensation amount.

(2.) Mr. Palak Thakkar, learned advocate for the Insurance Company submitted that the F.I.R. and panchnama does not reflect the vehicle number involved in the accident, and suddenly one witness, Paras Shukla, claimed to be the eye witness to the incident, had informed the D.S.P. of the incident only on 3/12/2001, for the F.I.R., which had been filed on 26/10/2001. Mr. Thakkar, thus, stated that the witness cannot be believed.

(3.) While, countering the argument and in context of the Cross Objection, Advocate Mr. Amit N.Patel submitted that the deceased was a pedestrian, who was walking on the side of the road, and as per the eye witness, he had seen the rash and negligent driving of the driver of Maruti van, who dashed the deceased and had run away from the place. Mr. Patel, submitted that as per the evidence eye witness had followed the involved vehicle and had run up to sector-23 behind the vehicle to stop it, but he failed to do so, and during that process, he had noted number of the vehicle as GJ-1-BK-2426. 3.1 Advocate Mr. Patel stated that driver and owner of the vehicle had been made party respondents, who had filed their written statement at Exh.20, and they had not denied the accident, but had pleaded to prove the age, income and injuries by documentary evidence. Mr. Patel stated that the driver of the involved vehicle was not examined and nothing is on record to disbelieve the eye witness, who had followed the vehicle.