NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. RAJUBEN RAMBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the Insurance Company is directed against the judgment and award dated February 18, 1985, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Rajkot District, Rajkot awarding compensation of Rs. 40,000/- to respondents Nos. 1 to 5 original claimants. The only contention which is raised on behalf of the appellant is that the Tribunal has erred in holding that deceased Harsur Mandal was walking on the road when he was knocked down by the motor vehicle in question causing fatal injuries to the deceased. It is submitted that according to the statement made by the deceased before police, soon after the accident, he was travelling by the motor vehicle as a passenger and that he had paid one rupee to the driver of the vehicle. It is submitted that in the face of this statement made by the deceased before police, it cannot be believed that deceased was walking on the road when he was knocked down by the vehicle. No attempt is made to prove the alleged statement made by the deceased before police. All that is tendered in evidence is an entry made in the police diary in which substance of the statement made by the deceased was recorded. If the appellant wanted to rely on the statement made by the deceased, it should have produced original or in any case true copy of the statement and proved that such statement was in fact made. In absence of the statement on record no reliance can be placed on the substance recorded in the police diary. On the other hand there is evidence of Vashram Laxman Exh. 59 which proves that the deceased was walking on the road when he was knocked down by the vehicle. We see no reason to disbelieve the testimony of Vashram Laxman. Besides this evidence, there is no other evidence which supports the plea of the appellant. The driver of the vehicle has not been examined. In absence of the version of the driver, as already observed above, we see no reason to discard the evidence of Vashram Laxman. His evidence establishes that the deceased who was walking on the road was knocked down by the vehicle as a result of the accident which was caused by the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver.

(2.) NO other point is raised on behalf of the appellant. We, therefore, do not see any reason to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal. The appeal fails and is rejected.