MANASHA DEBNATH Vs. KISHORE ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the claimant Smt. Manasha Debnath against the award dated 16 -05 -2009 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala in T.S.(MAC) 671 of 2002 whereby the Tribunal rejected the claim petition and furthermore the claimant is also aggrieved by the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 29 -09 -2010 whereby the review petition was also dismissed.

(2.) THE claimant filed the claim petition through her parents alleging that on 22 -08 -2002 when the claimant was 7 years old, she was hit by a Maruti Van bearing No.TR -01 -A -0600. According to the claimant, she had suffered grievous injuries during the accident and permanent disablement and, therefore, she claimed compensation. In the claim petition, it was mentioned that a case against the driver of the Van had been registered as case No.51 of 2002 under sections 279/338 of IPC in Amtali Police Station. The owner of the vehicle did not appear to contest the case and, therefore, the Insurance Company applied for permission to contest the appeal on all grounds.

(3.) THIS is a case where the occurrence of the accident was not denied in the written statement either by the owner or by the Insurance Company. The allegation of negligence was also not denied either by the owner or by the Insurance Company. I am constrained to observe that the Tribunal acted as if he was the lawyer for the Insurance Company. True it is, that a claimant must prove its case but if a respondent does not deny the facts and does not even cross -examine the witness when he appeared in the witness box, then no further proof is required.