SAMIRKUMAR KARNABHAI PAREDI Vs. PARSHOTTAM TAPUBHAI MODHVADIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 1.7.2006 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Junagadh in MAC Petition No. 395 of 1997 by which the Tribunal dismissed the appellant's claim petition for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

(2.) ON 11.2.1997, the appellant and his nephew were travelling on a Hero Honda motor cycle. The motor cycle met with an accident with the matador driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured by respondent No.3 Insurance Company. The appellant sustained injuries resulting into a fracture which also required surgery. The appellant filed claim petition for compensation of Rs.1,50,000/ -. An application was also filed under Section 140 of the Act for interim compensation and the Tribunal allowed the said application and awarded Rs.25,000/ - as compensation under the No Fault principle as embodied in Section 140 of the Act. Thereafter the claim petition under Section 166 of the Act was tried on merits. The Tribunal held that the appellant failed to prove that the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving by the matador driver and that it was the appellant motor cyclist himself who was responsible for the accident. In view of that finding, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition, but while doing so, the Tribunal further directed the appellant claimant to refund the amount of compensation received by him under Section 140 of the Act.

(3.) THOUGH served, none appears for the respondents.