BHUPATI DWIVEDI Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant, registered owner of the offending vehicle has preferred this appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (in short the Act) being aggrieved by the award dated 9.12.2009 passed by the Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Fast Tract) Umaria in Claim Case No. 75/09 whereby exonerating the Respondent No. 1/insurer, the claim of the Respondent No. 2 with respect of the injuries sustained by him in the alleged vehicular accident has been awarded against the Appellant for the sum of Rs. ,105,000/-along with the interest at the rate of 7% P.A from the date of the award.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that on 21.8.04 at about 5 O' Clock in the evening when the Respondent No. 2, after answering the call of nature, was returning to his home in village Akhrad, on the way he was dashed by the offending Jeep bearing registration No. MP 54-D-177 driven by the Appellant in a rash and negligent manner, resultantly, he sustained various injuries on his person. He was taken to the hospital Katni and thereafter shifted to Jabalpur in Jamdar Hospital where subsequent treatment was taken by him. In such accident, besides the other injuries, he sustained some fracture of Tibia Febula bone in the left leg whereby, as per the available record and the findings of the tribunal, he sustained 40% permanent disability. The vehicle was registered in the name of the Appellant while the same was insured with Respondent No. 1. With these averments, the Respondent No. 2 has preferred his claim before the tribunal for the sum of Rs. 17,77,700/-against the Appellant and Respondent No. 1 with a prayer to saddle the liability to indemnify the same against the Appellant and Respondent No. 1 jointly and severally.

(3.) In reply of the Appellant, by denying the facts stated in the petition, relating to the alleged accident, it is stated that Respondent No. 2 himself was riding his bicycle in rash and negligent manner consequently he fell down and sustained the alleged injury with some stone and subsequently he demanded the money for his treatment from the Appellant. When the Appellant denied to give the same then by fabricating the false story, a false FIR was lodged against the Appellant vehicle and, in such premises, the prayer for dismissal of the claim is made.