SARLI DEVI Vs. MOOL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This claim petition has been filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 as compensation on account of injuries suffered by the claimant in the accident which happened on 19.12.1998, involving a scooter bearing registration No. HNM 260, in which the claimant suffered serious injuries. The claim petition was controverted by the respondent No. 1 Mool Chand, the driver of the scooter, respondent No. 2 the owner of the vehicle and the respondent No. 3 the insurance company. On the pleas of the parties, the following issues were framed:

(2.) Under issue No. 1, the Tribunal held that the statement of Sarli Devi claimant, who appeared as PW 1 did not inspire confidence for the reason that she was unaware of the name of the driver of the scooter or the number of the scooter or of Hawa Singh, the main witness, as these facts had not found mention in the F.I.R. The Tribunal accordingly held that it was not proved that Mool Chand had been driving the scooter in question at the time of the accident. The claim petition was accordingly dismissed. It is against the said award that the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the evidence with their assistance.