JAGTAR SINGH Vs. RAJBINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above cases are connected. The appeals by the owner and driver are FAO No.5416, 5417 of 2010 and FAO No.5036 of 2010 the appeal by the claimants for enhancement.

(2.) All the claims arise out of a motor accident involving a common Maruti Car and tractor that belonged to the first appellant. The driver in the Motor Car had been injured in the collision. The case had been registered against the driver of the tractor immediately on a FIR lodged by one Beg Raj on 29.9.2007, that was the same day of the accident. The contention in defence by the driver and owner was that it was a rainy day and due to misty conditions, the visibility was poor and the driver of the Maruti car had no adequate visibility and he had dashed against the tractor by his own negligent driving. It was also contended that the eye witness Beg Raj who had lodged the FIR did not know what it contained and he came to the Court to depose that his signatures were taken on some blank papers and a false FIR came to be registered. Yet another witness who claimed that he was an eye witness, Baldev Singh was examined as RW-2 to state that there had been no negligence on the part of the driver of the tractor.

(3.) The Tribunal had found that the negligence of the tractor driver had been established by the fact that a criminal case had been registered against the driver of the tractor and that the claimants themselves had given evidence about the negligent driving of the driver of the tractor. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the reliance on the registration of complaint by the police was insufficient to hold the issue of negligence against the tractor driver to state that the driver had also lodged a complaint on 2.4.2008 against the driver of the Car. According to me, if the issue