TASLEEMAN BEGUM Vs. ATAULLA KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. S. Rawat, J. The first appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been filed against the judgment and order dated 21-10-2002 passed by Motor Ac cidents Claims Tribunal /additional Dis trict Judge (hereinafter referred as Tri bunal'), Nainital in M. A. C. P No. 236 / 1996 Smt. Tasleeman Begum Vs. Sri Ataulla Khan, whereby the learned Tri bunal has dismissed the claim petition.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act was filed by Smt. Tasleeman Bagum-appellant (the wife of deceased) alleging therein that on 27. 05. 1995 while her husband Basi-ud-din (deceased) was going on main road near the gate of Mandi Samiti, Pilibhit Sitarganj road, the offending truck No. URP-5902 came from behind and hit the deceased and due to which the dececised sustained grievous injuries as a result of rash and negligent driving by its driver. It was fur ther alleged the deceased was aged about 50 years at the time of incident and he was a carpenter. He was earn ing Rs. 4000/- pm. Thus, the claimant-appellant had filed a claim petition for compensation of Rs. 15,73,000/ -.

(3.) THE Tribunal on the basis of the appraisal of the evidence of the parties had rejected the claim petition filed by the claimant. THE Tribunal came to the conclusion that the claimant had mis erably failed to prove that the offending truck was involved in the accident in which the deceased sustained the inju ries and succumbed to the injuries. THE learned Tribunal had further held that the evidence of PW2 Babu, who was said to be the eyewitness of the acci dent, was not credible and cogent on the ground that he appeared in the evidence before the criminal court in criminal case no. 1031/1995 State Vs. Chote under section 279. 304a IPC and he had stated a discrepant version that he was not present at the spot at time of acci dent and he did not see the accident. THE learned Tribunal had rejected the claim petition. Feeling aggrieved by this, the present appeal has been filed before this Court.