NAGAMMAL Vs. MUTHIRAIYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the claimant challenging the dismissal of the claim petition.

(2.) On 16.10.2001, during night hours, a two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-48- 7600 which was ridden by the first respondent in rash and negligent manner, dashed against the son of the claimant and he succumbed to the injuries on the spot. The said vehicle was owned by the second respondent and insured with the third respondent. The first respondent remained ex parte before the Tribunal. The second respondent has disputed the manner of the accident. However, he submitted that the 3rd respondent is liable to pay the compensation amount, as the policy was in force and the first respondent had valid license at the time of the accident. The third respondent / Insurance Company has stated that the claimant and the respondents 1 and 2 colluding together filed the claim petition and that the said vehicle had not involved in the accident.

(3.) On the side of the claimant, the claimant herself was examined as PW1 and two eyewitness were examined as PWs.2 & 3 and the investigating officers were examined as PWs.4 & 5 and Exs.P1 to P5 were marked. On the side of the respondents, the first respondent was examined as RW1 and the officials of the third respondent were examined as RWs.2 and 3 and Exs.R1 to R6 were filed. On the side of the Court, Ex.X1 copy of the family card is marked. The Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition holding that the first respondent, rider of the vehicle, was acquitted in the criminal case in C.C.No.318 of 2002 and therefore, the negligence has not been proved and that involvement of the vehicle also has not been proved.