MOHANRAJ Vs. S JAYALALITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is preferred by the claimant against the order and decree dated dated 06.08.2004 made in MCOP No.703 of 2002 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Judge), Erode.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts in a nutshell are as follows:

(3.) HEARD the counsel. On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P20 were marked. On the side of the second respondent-Insurance company, no one was examined and no documents were marked to substantiate their claim. P.W.1 is the claimant. PW2-Appusamy is an eye witness to the occurrence. PW.3 is the Doctor Sachithanandam. Ex.P1 is the copy of the first information report. Ex.P2 is the copy of the motor vehicle Inspector's report relating to the car. Ex.P3 is the copy of the motor vehicle Inspector's report relating to the moped. Ex.P4 is the copy of rough sketch. Ex.P5 is the copy of the observation mahazar. Ex.P6 is the copy of the wound certificate. Ex.P7 is the copy of charge sheet. Ex.P8 is the copy of judgment. Exs.P9 and P10 are the copies of discharge summary. Exs.P11 and P12 are medical bills. Ex.P13 is the doctor's notes. Ex.P14 are photographs and negatives. Ex.P15 is the xerox copy of the School transfer certificate. Ex.P16 is the xerox copy of the driving licence of the claimant. Ex.P17 is the X-ray. Ex.P18 is the Ambulance receipt. Ex.P19 is disability certificate. Ex.P20 is X-ray. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent's car and the finding is based on valid materials and evidence.