LAWS(RAJ)-2016-5-316

MANJU LATA PAREEK Vs. MUKESH SHARMA AND ANR.

Decided On May 30, 2016
Manju Lata Pareek Appellant
V/S
Mukesh Sharma And Anr. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the civil misc. appeals arise out of common judgment and award 8.2.2016 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special) Court, Communal Riots), Jaipur ('the Tribunal' for short hereinafter), hence same are being decided by a common judgment.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the claimants filed claim petitions against the respondents before the Tribunal claiming compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss suffered by them due to grievous injuries in an accident taken place on 19.12.2010 at 3.30 P.M. nearby Hari Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur due to rash and negligence of the car driver bearing No. RJ-14-CH-7507. Claimants further submitted in their claim petitions that they were going to Malviya Nagar by their Kinetic Scooter No. RJ-14-23M-7750. When they reached nearby Hari Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, then suddenly aforesaid car came with fast speed and hit the claimants Kinetic Scooter. The claimants further mentioned in their claim petitions that the driver of the car was driving the same with rash and negligent manner. In the result the claimants fell down and sustained grievous injuries. They further submitted against respondent No. 1-Mukesh Sharma and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted against him.

(3.) The claim petition filed by the claimant Smt. Manju Lata Pareek was registered as claim petition No. 772/2015 (1602/2011) and the claim petition filed by the claimant Amar Nath Pareek was registered as 773/2015 (1601/2011). Thereafter, notices were issued to the respondents. Replies to the claim petitions were filed. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal framed four issues. The claimants appellants in support of their case produced three witnesses and got exhibited certain documents three witnesses and go exhibited certain documents which include the police and medical documents, whereas the opposite party did not produce any oral or documentary evidence.