PANKAJ KUMAR MEENA Vs. DHARMRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant/claimant and learned counsel for the respondent no.3 ­ insurance company. None has appeared for the respondents no.1 & 2, the driver & owner respectively of the offending vehicle, despite service.

(2.) THE instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/claimant against the judgment dated 26.10.2010 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shahpura, District Bhilwara in Claim Case No.123/2010 (66/2007) whereby the claim application filed by the appellant under Section 166 of the motor Vehicles Act was rejected. The appeal is barred by 91 days. Notice of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was issued. Learned counsel Mr.Anil Kaushik has appeared on behalf of the respondent no.3 insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident.

(3.) THE claim application was filed by the claimant claiming that on 4.3.2007, he was proceeding on foot from his house towards his agriculture field. At that time, the driver of the TVS Suzuki Motorcycle no.RJ -06 -3M -8734 owned by Ladu Lal @ Ladu Ram (respondent no.2) and insured by United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (respondent no.3) drove the same rashly and negligently and collided with him causing injuries to his foot. The appellant's leg was fractured due to the accident. He became permanently disabled and crippled due to the injuries. An F.I.R. No.99/2007 was registered at P.S. Jahajpur for the offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC in relation to the said accident wherein a charge -sheet was filed against the respondent no.1. The claim application was filed on various grounds and a total compensation of Rs.21,05,000/ - was claimed by the appellant.