PUSHPA AGGARWAL Vs. SH.KRISHNA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant/claimant-Pushpa Aggarwal is aggrieved by the order dated 21.5.1993 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (for short the Tribunal) whereby her claim petition under Sections 166,140,141 and 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988, seeking compensation for the injuries suffered in a motor vehicular accident, was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly noticed the facts of the present case are that appellant Pushpa Aggarwal filed a claim petition alleging therein that on 22.10.1991 she boarded a three wheeler No. HR 07 7435(offending vehicle) from Mohan Nagar Chowk, Kurukshetra for going to Pipli and then from Pipli to Ladwa. It was further alleged that the offending vehicle was being driven by respondent no.1 Krishan Kumar at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and that at 8.30 am when they reached near Rest House located on Pipli-Kurukshetra Road, Pipli, respondent no.1 suddenly applied brakes as a result of which the offending vehicle turned turtle and in this accident the appellant suffered multiple injuries on her person and also suffered fracture of the left ankle. A daily diary report no.26 dated 23.10.1981 (Ex.P3) was lodged with PS Sadar Thanesar in this regard. It was stated that the said DDR be read as a part of her claim petition. On these allegations the claimant/appellant claimed compensation amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- against the respondents.

(3.) Upon notice respondents 1 and 2 being driver and owner of the offending vehicle filed a joint written statement refuting the claim of the appellant/claimant. It was stated by them that on 22.10.1991 another three wheeler bearing no.HYK 4299 driven by one Babu Ram had met with an accident near Pipli in which a few passengers including the claimant received injuries and that the matter was compromised as said three wheeler no. HYK 4299 was not insured. It was further stated in the reply that 3-4 days after the accident said Babu Ram, driver of three wheeler bearing no.HYK 4299 had approached respondent no.2 Yash Pal (owner of offending vehicle) to shown him the registration certificate as well insurance of the offending vehicle as he wanted to get insurance of his three wheeler (HYK 4299). The said documents were returned to respondent no.2 after sometime. It was thus alleged that claimant/appellant in collusion with said Babu Ram had filed the claim petition.