UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. SHARAFAT ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the appellant United India Insurance Company Ltd., and Mr. Siddharth, learned Counsel for the claimant-respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and have gone through the record including the impugned judgment and award dated 4.9.1996 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/12th Additional District Judge, Meerut, in Claim Petition No. 513 of 1993, Sharafat Ali and Anr. v. Ramesh and Anr.

(2.) BY the impugned award a direction has been made for compensation of Rs. 91,200/- to be given to the respondent No. Sharafat Ali, father of the deceased child Sajid and the respondent No. 2, Smt. Mobina, mother of the deceased under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) A written statement was filed by the owner of the vehicle as well as the Insurance Company denying the claim of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. After framing Issues the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 examined P.W. 1 Maskoor eye-witness of the occurrence and P.W. 2 Sharafat Ali, father of the deceased. No witness was examined by the appellant Insurance Company or the owner of the vehicle. After appreciating the evidence the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that that due to rash and negligent driving of the Matador No. DDA 9010 injury was caused to Sajid resulting into his instantaneous death. Statement of P.W. 1 Maskoor eyewitness of the occurrence was not controverted by statement of any witness, who would have been examined by the appellant or the owner of the vehicle. FIR and post-mortem examination report also confirmed the death having taken place on account of the injury caused by the Matador. Therefore, it is found that there is no illegality in the appreciation of evidence and the finding made by the Tribunal that due to rash and negligent driving of the Matador owned by the respondent No. 3, injury was caused and death of Sajid took place is affirmed.