V DEVI Vs. M SATHISH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is preferred by the claimants against the award dated 04.03.2004 made in MCOP No.859 of 2002 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts in a nutshell are as follows: The deceased Ashok Kumar met with motor vehicle accident that took place on 19.08.2001 at about 16.10 hours. While he was travelling as a pillion rider in a motor cycle bearing registration No.TN-20-W-9938 from South to North at ECR Road, the rider/owner Satish kumar drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and hit the stationed TATA Sumo bearing registration No.TN-09-9122. Due to which, the motor cycle was capsized and the deceased sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was taken to Malar hospital, Chennai, where he died on the same day. The claimants are mother and father of the deceased. They claimed a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation. The second respondent-Insurance company resisted the claim. On pleadings the Tribunal framed the following issues:- "1. Whether the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motor cycle N-20-W-9938? 2. Whether the petition is to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties?

(3.) HEARD the counsel. On the side of the claimants PWs.1 to 3 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P11 were marked. On the side of the respondents no one was examined and no document was marked to substantiate their claim. PW1 is the mother of the deceased Suresh. PW2 is an eye witness to the accident. PW3 is the employer of the deceased. Ex.P1 is the copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the copy of the charge sheet. Ex.P3 is the death report. Ex.P4 is the copy of Post Mortem certificate. Ex.P5 is the medical receipts series. Ex.P6 is the copy of legal heirship certificate. Ex.P7 is the transfer certificate. Ex.P8 is the B.E. Degree certificate. Ex.P9 is the salary certificate. Ex.P10 is the Xerox copy of identity card. Ex.P11 is the copy of confirmation letter After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal had given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motor cycle and the finding is based on valid materials and evidence.