AJAY @ BUNTY Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ajay @ Bunty, the claimant-appellant has filed the present appeal against the award dated 09.11.2009 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula ( for short 'the Tribunal') whereby his claim petition was dismissed.

(2.) The appellant had filed the claim petition under section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') for grant of compensation on account of the injuries suffered by him in the accident, which occurred on 01.07.2003. He was 29 years old at the time of the accident and it was claimed that he had been earning Rs.10,000/- per month by way of running a business at old Panchkula under the name and style of "M/s Sharma Studio".

(3.) On the fateful day, the appellant alongwith Rajinder Kumar, respondent No.1, had gone to Kalka in connection with his business in a Maruti van bearing registration No. CH-01-N-1782 which was being driven by respondent No. 1. On returning during night at about 11.00 PM they met with an accident near gate No. 457 MES Colony, Chandimandir, on account of rash and negligent driving of Maruti Van by respondent No.1. On perusal of the evidence as well as other documents, placed on the file, learned Tribunal held that as the income of the appellant was more than Rs.40,000/- per annum so the claim petition filed by him under section 163-A of the Act is not maintainable. Further learned Tribunal concluded that as the appellant had earlier filed a petition under section 166 of the Act, which was dismissed on 07.08.2007, and this fact had not been disclosed by him while filing the present claim petition, hence also the instant claim petition was not maintainable. For not disclosing this fact about the filing of the earlier claim petition costs of Rs.3000/- were imposed upon the appellant.