A SENTHIL KUMAR Vs. BHUVANESWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/respondent has preferred the present appeal in C.M.A.No.1076 of 2011, to set aside the order passed in M.C.O.P.No.219 of 2005, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam.

(2.) The short facts of the case are as follows:-

(3.) The respondent in his counter had denied the allegations regarding rash and riding of his motorcycle and had submitted that he had ridden his motorcycle at a moderate speed. It was submitted that the petitioner, without noticing the motorcycle travelling in the road, had negligently crossed the road and caused the accident. It was submitted that the petitioner had only sustained minor injuries in the accident and that the petitioner had taken free treatment at the Government Hospital. It was submitted that the petitioner had not produced any documentary proof to show that she had taken treatment at private hospitals. It was also submitted that the petitioner had not produced any documentary evidence to show that she was earning a sum of Rs.150 per day through selling flowers. It was submitted that the claim was excessive.