FATIYA ALIAS FATESINGH Vs. GANGARAM GALIA MANDLOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred as "the Act") against the award dated 29.10.2010 passed in Claim Case No.39/2010 by the Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manawar, Dhar by which the claim of the appellants has been rejected.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that Bheru (deceased) on the date of incident i.e. on 29/10/2010 was travelling with driver nonapplicant No.1 Gangaram on a tractor bearing registration No.MP 11A.B. 3682 2 and trolley bearing registration No.MP 11MB 3683. The trolley was filled with mud/soil, which was to be deposited in the agricultural field. However, since they did not get any soil they were returning empty when near Manawar Banediya Road the tractor turned turtle due to rash and negligent driving of Gangaram. Bherusingh died in the incident. The offence was registered at the police station Manawar against the driver nonapplicant No.1 Gangaram at crime No.89/2010 for offence under Section 304A of the IPC. The claimants claimed that Bherusingh was 25 years of age at the time of the incident and he was earning a sum of Rs.6,000/ as agricultural labourer and spending the sum on his family since he was only the earning member.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellant has submitted the fact that there was ample evidence on record; despite which the claim was dismissed by the Claims Tribunal. Counsel vehemently submitted the fact that there was no doubt that Bherusingh (deceased) was travelling on the tractortrolley on the date of the incident and that he had died due to being crushed beneath the trolley. The FIR Ex.P/2 on record, the challan papers Ex.P/1, the spot map Ex.P/3, the recovery memo Ex.P/4 and the postmortem report Ex.P/5 and P/6 have all been discarded by the Claims Tribunal. Besides the driving licence, registration and the insurance papers of the alleged vehicle were all duly filed before the tribunal and in the circumstance, the claim ought to have been allowed, but the claim has been dismissed by the Claims Tribunal; merely because the Tribunal, on the basis of surmise, has come to a conclusion that the deceased Bherusingh himself was driving the tractor and hence, dismissed the claim. However, there is no evidence on record to prove these contentions. Hence, Counsel prayed that the impugned judgment be set aside.