NOORMOHAMED PEERMOHAMED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bombay, dismissed claim applica-tion No. 1470 of 1976 made by the appellant/applicant for compensation against the respondent no 1/7/85 giving rise to the present first appeal.

(2.) ON 24-7-1976 the appellant (for short claimant) was standing on the stone divider while crossing J.J. Road at Byculla from Bata company to Mazgaon side. At 12.00 noon an ambulance vehicle bearing No. MRA-2618 and owned by the Respondent State came from left hand side and knocked down the claimant. The claimant fell on the read and became unconscious and was taken to J.J.Hospital. He was indoor patient in J.J.Hospital for about one month. At the time of accident the claimant was about 15 years old and studying in 9th Standard. Because of the accident the claimant could not go to school for about a year. The claimant sustained injuries on the head. The medical certificate on record is X-1. The claimant made an application for compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for Greater Bombay claiming compensation of Rs.15,000/-. The respondent filed written statement and denied any negligence on the part of the driver of the ambu-lance No. MRA-2618. According to respondent therefore it was not liable to pay any compensation. The claimant examined himself and Dr. Umesh Vengsar-kar and produced medical certificate. No evidence was led by the respondent in rebuttal. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal concluded that the claimant had not been able to establish the neglegence of the ambulance driver and, therefore, was not entitled to any compensation. The tribunal however held that the claimant was injured in the said accident occurring on 24/7/76 and for injuries sustained, the claimant could have been entitled to the com-pensation of Rs.10,000/- had the accident occurred due to negligence of the driver of the ambulance. However, since the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held that the accident did not occur due to the negligence of the driver of the ambulance vehicle No. MRA 2618 belonging to the respondent, the claim petition was dismissed.

(3.) I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as well as the deposition of the claimant. The claimant in his deposition has stated that on 24-7-1976 at 12.00 noon he met with an accident while crossing J.J.Road at Byculla from Bata Company to Mazgaon side. The road was divided into two flanks and there were stone dividers. He crossed the first flank of the read and was standing on the stone divider. At that time the ambulance vehicle bearing No. MRA-2618 came from left hand side with fast speed and knocked him down while he was standing on the stone divider. He deposed that he fell on the road after he was hit by the vehicle and fell unconscious. The claimant has been cross-examined at some length and I find that this material deposition about accident cannot be said to have been shaken in cross-examination. In cross-examination he clearly stated that the body portion of the ambulance touched him. The Tribunal rejected his deposition on the ground that the claimant admitted that he was accompanied by Mohd. Yunus he was not exam-ined. Non-examination of Mohd. Yunus cannot furnish a ground for rejecting the testimony of the claimant when it was reliable and inherently probable. The Tribunal observed that taking into consideration that some pedestrians were standing on his left hand side and the applicant only was allegiance knocked down by the vehicle, it appears that the claimant lost his control by biding and looking to the traffic on the left hand side and by doing so he fell on the ground. These observations by the Tribunal are based on surmises and conjectures. The respondent did not lead any evidence to rebut the evidence of the claimant and in my view the claimant has been able to prove that he was knocked down by the vehicle in question when he was standing on the stone divider and Tribunal erred in discarding the testimony of the claimant.