NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. KANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This First Appeal From Order has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment and award dated 17.8.2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Aligarh M.A.C.T. No. 192 of 1999.

(2.) Sri A.C. Nigam appearing on behalf of the appellant Insurance Company has assailed the award by submitting that the claimants could not prove rash and negligent driving of the vehicle in question since the PW-1 Dharmendra Kumar was not an eye witness and no reliance could be placed on the first information report. He has further submitted that there was no cogent evidence on record with regard to the income of the deceased and in the absence of the driving licence the Insurance Company could not be held liable to pay the compensation.

(3.) We have considered the submission advanced on behalf of the appellant and perused the impugned judgment and award. The Tribunal had framed the issues and issue No. 1 was with respect to rash and negligent driving of Vehicle No. DL-1 GA-2332 on 1.4.1999 at about 5.50 p.m. near the clinic of Dr. Gyan Kumar situate in Gandhi Park. While considering the evidence it recorded that the deceased Kailash Chandra Bansal who was advocate by profession was going on his Motorcycle No. U.P. 13-A 4205 and met with the accident with the offending vehicle and because of the injury suffered by him he died. Sri Dharmendra Kumar the son of the deceased, deposed as PW-1 and stated that the driver of the offending vehicle was caught on the spot. His cross examination was confined to the income of the deceased and his son. The Tribunal considered the first information report which was lodged on 1.4.1999 at 18.10. hours allegedly by one Raghuveer Prasad son of Omkar Prasad who stated that he was standing in front of the clinic of Dr. Gyan Kumar when he saw the deceased K.C. Bansal coming on his Kawasaki Motorcycle from the side of the bus station when the offending vehicle which was coming from the opposite direction and was driven rashly and negligently hit the Motorcycle whereupon the deceased fell down and died due to the injuries. He reported that the incident was seen by him and along with Vinod Kumar Jain and other persons they caught the driver on the spot. On the aforesaid complaint of Raghuveer Prasad written by Vinod Kumar Jain an FIR was lodged at the police station against the driver Amreek Singh of the vehicle No. DL-1 GA 2332 at police station Gandhi Park. Upon investigation chargesheet was filed. The Tribunal also took into account the site plan, the post mortem report and the technical report of the offending vehicle and came to a conclusion that the truck in question was being driven rashly and negligently and it was not proved that the deceased in any manner contributed by being negligent. He was driving on the correct side whereas the offending vehicle was in the middle of the road when it hit the Motorcycle. The Tribunal therefore found that the driver of the offending vehicle was driving rashly and negligently and answered the issue as such.