VIJAYA Vs. VENKATESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants / petitioners have preferred the present appeal against the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.116 of 1989, on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Thanjavur.

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

(3.) The second respondent, in his counter has denied the averments in the claim that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent's lorry. The averments in the claim that the first petitioner had sustained permanent disability due to injuries sustained in the said accident was also not admitted. It was submitted that the first petitioner had received treatment only for six days in the hospital and as such, the contentions in the claim that the first petitioner had sustained serious injuries is not correct. It was submitted that in a claim filed by an injured petitioner, the legal-heirs of the injured petitioner cannot be added as necessary parties in the claim after the death of the injured petitioner, as per the Motor Vehicles Act. It was also submitted that the first respondent's lorry had not been insured with the second respondent, at the time of accident. It was submitted that the petitioners have to prove that the driver of the first respondent's lorry had a valid licence at the time of accident. It was submitted that the claim was excessive.