LAWS(RAJ)-2022-10-150

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SARASVATI DEVI

Decided On October 12, 2022
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Appellant
V/S
Sarasvati Devi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant insurance Company against the judgment and award dtd. 17/4/2015 passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge No.2, Beawar in M.A.C. Case No.257/2012(118/2011) by which the claim petition filed by the claimants-respondents under Sec. 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988') has been allowed and the appellant-insurance Company has been directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,13,500.00 with interest @ 6% from the date of filing the claim petition to the claimants- respondents.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant-insurance Company submits that the accident occurred on 7/10/2010 and after the said accident, the injured-Jeevanlal was admitted in Government Amrit Kaur Hospital, Beawar, District Ajmer wherein hospital's records, it was mentioned that the injured slipped from the motor cycle. Counsel submits that his discharge ticket (Ex.10) of the said hospital indicates that because of slipping from motor cycle, he sustained certain injuries. Counsel submits that as per the record of S.K. Soni Hospital (Exs. 14 and 16), the cause of death of the injured/deceased is cardiac arrest. The certain manipulations were done in the S.K. Soni Hospital's record bearing (Ex.14), the cause of death was shown as natural, while in the similar document (Ex- 16), the cause of death was mentioned as accident. Counsel submits that these documents were manipulated to get compensation from the Tribunal. Counsel submits that the name of the registered owner of the vehicle is Naresh Kumar son of Jeevalal, but intentionally his identity was suppressed and his name was mentioned as Naresh Kumar son of Uttam Chand.

(3.) Counsel submits that the deceased was the father of the registered owner Naresh Kumar and in order to get claim under Sec. 163A of the Act of 1988, his identity was suppressed.