TULSI Vs. VASU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) These appeals have been preferred by the appellants-claimants against the common judgment dated 7.6.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track) cum Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dungarpur whereby the learned Tribunal rejected the claim petitions filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act in entirety. The appellants/claimants have approached this Court by way of these appeals assailing the rejection of their claim applications.

(3.) Mr. Vishnoi, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants-claimants, vehemently urged that the Tribunal rejected the claim applications filed by the appellants on a total conjectural theory and thus, the appeals deserve acceptance. He submitted that as per the facts mentioned in the claim applications, the victims were sitting on the road side on 23.1.2007. At about 1.30 P.M., a tractor trolley being driven in a rash and negligent fashion by the driver Vasu overturned crushing under it, the two deceased as well as injured persons. He urged that the F.I.R. in relation to the accident was filed promptly on 23.1.2007 at P.S. Sagwara. The specific averments in the F.I.R. were to the effect that the tractor trolley overturned on the persons sitting on the road side causing the death of two persons and injuries to numerous others. He submitted that the evidence on this specific aspect was led by the claimants in support of the claim applications. As against the evidence of the claimants, no evidence was led by the respondents to counter the case as set up in the claim applications. He thus submitted that the finding recorded by the Tribunal on the issue No. 1 that the victims were travelling in the trolley attached to the tractor at the time of the accident is totally unjustified as being purely based on conjectures and surmises. He, therefore, prayed that the appeals should be accepted and either this Court should itself assess the compensation or else the matters be remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh decision after setting aside the findings recorded by the Tribunal.