INDRA BAHADUR VERMA Vs. PURSHOTTAM DAS NISHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INDRA Bahadur Verma, the owner of Scooter No. U M V 1454. who is alleged to have caused the death of Smt. Sanichari Devi on U-6-P8 and against whom the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by its award dated 14-2-91 has awarded a sum of Rs. 15000/-, has preferred this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the Act).

(2.) THE factual matrix of the case is that under sections 52-A, 110 and 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, a claim petition was filed by Purshottam Das Nishad the husband and Smt. Rambhawati, the daughter of the deceased Smt. Sanichari Devi. An FIR was lodged in that connection by one Srikant, the grand son of the deceased alleging that on 11-6-88 at about 7.35 P M the deceased was going to market to make some purchases and at a distance of 100 metre from the house the appellant was going on Scooter and by that scooter the deceased met with an accident. In other words, the deceased being crushed down with Scooter became unconscious. Later on she was taken to hospital where she died In support of the claim petition three witnesses, namely, PW 1 Purshottam, husband of the deceased, Srikant, the informant, PW 2 and Rajesh Pd. PW 3 were examined, who supported the case set up in the claim petition. Relying upon their statements award has been given under the provisions of section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (Old Act) where the liability is without proof of negligence or without fault.

(3.) RELIANCE was placed on Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dhanram Singh, 1990 AC/ 321. That was also a case for compensation under sections 110-A. where the plea was negligence without proof. In that connection the initial burden was on the claimant and that was not discharged. In the instant case the award has been made and compensation has been awarded under section 92-A (3) of the Act. Hence that case is also of no assistance to the appellant.