MOHAN LAL Vs. AMAR SHANKAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-claimant, namely, Mohan Lal has filed the present appeal against the award dated 07.10.2004 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (for short, the Tribunal), whereby his claim petition was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the claimant had filed a claim petition with an averment that on 24.01.2003 at about 4 AM, he was standing in front of three-wheeler stand, Pipli on G.T. Road, on the left side of the road, when the offending Jeep bearing registration No.CH-03F-2011 being driven by Amar Shankar (respondent No. 1 herein) in rash and negligent manner at high speed came and hit the petitioner after coming on its wrong side of the road. Due to this impact, the petitioner received injuries on various parts of his body including fracture on legs and arms. After the accident, he was admitted in Apna Hospital, Kurukshetra by Raj Kumar and Inder Pal, who were present at the spot. The driver-respondent No. 1-Amar Shankar assured Raj Kumar (son of the injured) that he will pay all the expenses incurred on the treatment, but he did not pay any amount. As per the claimant, the driver was responsible for the accident and he was challaned by the police for the same. On account of injuries received by the claimant, he remained admitted in Apna Hospital, Kurukshetra from 24.01.2003 and had spent Rs. 70,000/- on his treatment, special diet, purchase of medicines etc. and more amount is required to be spent on future treatment. Hence, the claim petition was filed.

(3.) Respondents No. 1 and 2 (driver and owner of the offending Jeep) filed their joint written statement broadly controverting the allegations of the claim petition and stated that the alleged accident had taken place due to sole negligence of the petitioner himself. There was no fault or negligence on the part of respondent No. 1. The vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Company Limited-respondent No. 3 herein. It was submitted that since respondent No. 1 was having valid and effective driving licence, they are not liable to pay any compensation. It was averred that respondent No. 1 was coming on correct side of the road and when he reached near Bus Stand Pipli on G.T. Road, there was a heavy fog and for this reason the vehicle was very slow. In the meantime, the claimant tried to cross the road from wrong side without caring about the on-coming traffic and dashed in the right side of bumper near window and fell of his own. In this case, the FIR was lodged after four days of the accident.