PANKAJ VASHISTHA Vs. ASHOK SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been filed against the judgment dated 26.04.2011, passed by the Judge, Special Court (Communal Riots/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter 'the learned MACT') whereby the claim of the appellant -claimant (hereinafter 'the claimant') has been dismissed by the MACT holding that no negligence of the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No. RJ -14 -32 -M -1493 insured with the respondent -National Insurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter 'the Insurance Company') having been established, the claimant was not liable to any compensation.

(2.) THE counsel for the claimant submitted that the judgment dated 26.04.2011 is perverse in holding that there was no negligence of the rider of the offending motorcycle in spite of the un -controverted evidence of the claimant. Counsel submitted that the offending motorcycle was insured under a comprehensive package policy and as pillion rider thereof, the claimant was entitled to compensation for the injuries suffered in the accident.

(3.) THE facts of the case are that a motorcycle bearing registration No. RJ -14 -32 -M -1493 was owned by one Ashok Sharma. The said motorcycle was insured under a comprehensive package policy with the Insurance Company for the period 19.01.2004 to 18.01.2005. On 21.06.2004, the claimant was pillion rider on the said motorcycle which was being ridden by the owner Ashok Sharma. It appears that the said motorcycle was involved in an accident with another motorcycle which did not bear a registration number. A FIR with regard to the accident was lodged by Ashok Sharma, the owner of the insured motorcycle on 07.08.2004. On investigation made, the police found that the accident of 21.06.2004 was occasioned by rash and negligent riding of the "other" motorcycle which could not be ascertained for reasons of no registration number being given out by the informant or otherwise found from the investigation made by the police. A final report (negative) was therefore filed by the police and it appears that it was accepted by the competent court as no protest petition was filed by the informant or any other person.