EKNATH NANA SHINDE Vs. SHANKARAPPA CHANBASAPPA SHINDGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the learned Counsel, Shri Sali for the petitioner and Shri Mengane for respondent No. 2. None appears for respondent No. 1, though served.

(2.) THIS petition demonstrates the highly objectionable manner in which the claim of an accident victim was sought to be defeated by the respondents, obviously acting in collusion with some revenue officer, as will be evident from the facts set out below. What has been challenged in this petition is the Order dated 8th February 1989 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solapur, (for short, Tribunal) below Exhibit-23 in M. A. C. P. Darkhast No. 11 of 1986. The relevant facts are as under :-

(3.) THE petitioner was working as a clerk in the Postal Department at the Kasba Peth Post Office in Pune. On 4th October 1978, he went to his friend Shelar at Chinchwad, near Pune. While returning, at about 1 a. m. on 5th October 1978 the auto-rickshaw in which he was travelling was hit by a truck belonging to the first respondent Shankarappa Shindgi. The truck bearing No MHU. 5266 was driven by its driver Gangappa Nagappa Sanganwar. The truck was insured with the United India Fire and General Insurance Company Limited. As a result of the accident, the petitioner was thrown on the road and suffered severe injuries. He was removed to the K. E. M. Hospital at Pune straightaway from the place of impact. After a detailed treatment he was discharged on the 14th of March, 1979. He has lost his faculty of speech as a result of the shock and the injury suffered in the accident, which was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver Gangappa Sanganwar, who was employed by the first respondent Shankarappa Shindgi.