JAGDISH Vs. RAHUL BUS SERVICE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT -claimant -injured has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court in terms of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "the MV Act") and has questioned the judgment/award, dated 6th October, 2007, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chamba Division, Chamba, (H.P.) (for short "the Tribunal") in M.A.C. Petition No. 75 of 2004, titled as Jagdish versus Rahul Bus Service and others, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant came to be dismissed (for short "the impugned award").

(2.) BEFORE I give the brief resume of the case, I deem it proper to record herein that the appellant -claimant -injured has been driven from pillar to post and post to pillar by the authorities including the Tribunal and the insurer, who have succumbed to the procedural wrangles and tangles and this is how the purpose of granting of compensation in terms of the mandate of Chapters X, XI and XII of the MV Act stands defeated.

(3.) THE core points for consideration involved in this appeal are: