DIVISIONAL MANAGER Vs. KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is directed against the award passed in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.239 of 2006, dated 12.1.2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge) at Tiruvannamalai.

(2.) ON 8.2.2005 at about 2.00 p.m. along Devadhanapattu lake bond road when the the claimant was riding his TVS 50 mope, a lorry belonging to the second respondent came behind in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the moped causing the accident. The claimant has filed the claim petition for compensation of Rs.2 lakhs.

(3.) AS regards the delay in filing the FIR, the Tribunal has given a finding that mere delay in lodging the FIR would not show that the contents are false. It has also followed the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court inAIR 2001 SC 2075 [State of Himachal Pradesh v. Gian Chand] wherein Their Lordships have observed that the FIR is not a conclusive proof of negligence and its relevance is virtually limited to see that the accident has taken place. The rashness and negligence could be proved by the parties before the Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal independently. Therefore applying the dictum laid by the Honourable Supreme Court, mere delay in lodging FIR alone will not throw any suspicion over the contents of FIR.