NASEEMUDDEEN QUAJI Vs. HARI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing present civil misc. appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988') the claimant/ appellant has challenged the judgment and award dtd. 27/10/2017 passed by the Court of learned Addl. District Judge No.16, Jaipur Metropolitan (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal) [for short 'the Tribunal'] in MAC Petition No. (1/2015) (374/2005), (1924/2004), whereby the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant/ claimant.

(2.) The facts emerge out from the pleadings are that the claimant /appellant filed a claim petition before the tribunal mentioning therein that on 20/2/2004 at about 11:30 PM, he was going by motorcycle No. RJ-20-9M-6976 along-with his brother-in-law- Mohammad Khalid Faruki, from Sanganer Airport towards his house at Shastri Nagar. Mohammad Khalid was riding the motorcycle with moderate speed on the correct side of the road. When they reached near Durgapura Crossing, a jeep bearing No. RJ-14-1P-0161, being driven rashly, negligently and with excessive speed by its driver came from the opposite direction and by coming on the wrong side, hit the motorcycle which resulted into sustaining injuries by the claimant. The claimant was immediately taken to the SMS Hospital, Jaipur. The claimant further mentioned that as per information furnished by the people, he stated the number of Jeep as RJ-14-P-1566 which after the accident was passing from the place of incident. The claimant further mentioned in the claim petition that thereafter on getting the complete information and on the basis of information furnished by the persons who were present at the place of incident, very next day registered the FIR No.114/2004 at Police Station Sanganer for the offences under Sec. 279, 337 and 338 IPC. After investigation the police submitted the challan against the respondent/ non-claimant No.1 for the aforementioned offences. The claimant further mentioned that at the time of accident he was 32 years of age and by profession he is an Advocate. The claimant claimed compensation of Rs.8,30,000.00along-with interest @ 18% per annum.

(3.) Despite issuance of notice, no-one put in appearance on behalf of respondent/ non-claimant No.1.