DEVESH SHARMA AND ANOTHER Vs. KARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 is preferred by the appellants, who are owner and driver of the offending vehicle against an Award dated 6th Feb. 2006 in Claim Case No. 134/2005 passed by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shivpuri (M.P.), challenging the findings on the point of contributory negligence on their part and praying to absolve them from the liability of satisfying the awarded amount.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that on 20th March 2005 at about 8.45 a.m., the claimant-injured was returning after filling the patrol, back to his village Barad on his motor Cycle bearing Registration No. MP 33B/6772 with a pillion-rider Radha Mohan. In mid-way, the appellants who were on their Motorcycle bearing No. MP 33BA 1933, alleged to have come rashly and negligently from opposite side and dashed the vehicle of injured from front side resulting grievous injuries were sustained on his person by the claimant/injured. An F.I.R. was lodged on which a crime for offence under Sections 279 and 337 of I.P.C. was registered and after investigation the charge-sheet was filed before the criminal court. The claimant filed the petition under Sec. 166 of the Act against the wrong-doer/appellants. After considering the evidence on record, the learned tribunal passed an award for Rs. 60,000.00 and being the case of contributory negligence, the liability of 50% was determined for paying compensation amount of Rs. 30,000.00 to the claimant by the appellants. The counter report of the incident was also lodged by the appellants against the claimant being the driver of the motorcycle involved in accident on which a crime was registered under Sec. 279 /337 of I.P.C. against the claimant/injured. After investigation the charge-sheet was also filed against the claimant/respondent before the court.

(3.) The contentions put forth on behalf of the appellants are that the award under appeal is not in consonance with the evidence as adduced before the tribunal. It is submitted that tribunal without properly assessing the evidence granted compensation on the basis of permanent disability caused to the claimant whereas no such proof was placed by him. It is further submitted that the learned tribunal failed to appreciate that the claimant himself was responsible for accident and therefore he cannot be rewarded for his wrong. On the basis of the said submissions, it is prayed that by allowing the appeal, the award passed in favour of the claimant/injured may be set aside.