MUKESH Vs. GIAN PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of both the abovementioned appeals, which have been filed by the claimants, challenging the impugned Award dated 25.7.1998, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (in short 'the Tribunal'), whereby the claim petitions filed by the appellants were dismissed. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned Tribunal without appreciating the evidence on record, dismissed the claim petitions. As per the mechanical report, the car was totally damaged. As per the M.L.R., injured Mukesh received multiple injuries in the said accident. The accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the truck driver. The truck hit behind the car. He prays for the grant of compensations.

(2.) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent -Insurance Company submits that the learned Tribunal has rightly rejected the claim of the appellants. Therefore, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the impugned award, it emerges that the name of the driver of the offending truck was not disclosed. As per mechanical report, the vehicle got damaged 100%, as radiator was broken dash board was broken, engine wire were broken and bonnet had a bend, head lights were broken etc. No tyre of the car was found punctured, as stated by the claimants. From the perusal of the photographs, it emerges that the vehicle is so much damaged that one cannot think that the passenger would have been survived. There is nothing on record that who was driving the car at the time of the accident, nor an iota of evidence to suggest that the accident was caused in the manner, a alleged. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on analysing the entire record, this Court finds no perversity or illegality in the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the present appeals are dismissed.