The delay in lodging the First Information Report cannot be a ground to doubt the case of the claimant.

JUDGMENT :

The appellant is the Claimant in M.V.O.P.No.676 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- Principal District Judge, Guntur and the respondents are the respondents in the said case.

2. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the claim application.

3. The claimant filed a Claim Petition under sections 149 and 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the respondents praying the Tribunal to award an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a Motor Vehicle Accident occurred on 21.02.2003.

4. The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

On 21.02.2003 at about 11.30 p.m. when the petitioner was going on a bicycle along with one Home Guard by name Bhiksha Rao near R & B Bungalow at over bridge of Mangalagiri, the rider of Bajaj Boxer motor cycle bearing No.AP7N 5277 rode the same in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and hit against the bicycle, resulting which the petitioner and the pillion rider Bhiksha Rao sustained grievous injuries and the petitioner claimed an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards compensation.

5. The first respondent remained exparte. The second respondent filed counter denying the claim application and contended that the claimant is not entitled any compensation and the second respondent is not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner.

6. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues :

i. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of Bajaj motor cycle bearing No.AP 7N 5277?

ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation and if so, to what amount and against whom?

iii. To what relief?

7. During the course of enquiry in the claim petition, on behalf of the petitioner, PW1 to PW8 were examined and Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 and Ex.X1 to Ex.X13 were marked. On behalf of respondents RW1 and RW2 were examined and Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 were marked.

8. At the culmination of the enquiry, after considering the evidence on record and on appreciation of the same, the Tribunal has given a finding that the accident was occurred due to fault of a car driver, who hit the motor cycle of petitioner and spied away and not due to the fault of the first respondent’s motor cycle driver and the Tribunal dismissed the petition with costs.

9. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant filed the present appeal claiming the compensation amount.

10. Now, the points for consideration are :

1. Whether the Order of Tribunal needs any interference?

2. Whether the claimant/ appellant is entitled for compensation as prayed for?

11. POINT Nos.1 and 2:-

The Tribunal held in its order that since the accident in question is not proved by the claimant, he is not entitled any compensation, however, the respondents are not disputing about the injuries sustained by the claimant in a Motor Vehicle Accident.

12. The Tribunal held in its order that “Ex.X1 First Information Report was given by the petitioner, who is working as police constable in the same police station, to the police on the next day morning of the incident attributing the accident in a rash and negligent driving of the first respondent’s motor cycle driver, though PW1 and PW2 admitted the fact that the police station of Mangalagiri is within the distance of 2 to 3 furlongs from the scene of accident, for the reasons best known to the petitioner, he failed to report the matter immediately to the police”. The material available on record is that the complaint was lodged by the petitioner, who is the police constable, on the next date of accident and the pillion rider is a Home Guard. The petitioner/complainant, who lodged a complaint to the police is the rider of the said bicycle. The law is well settled that the delay in lodging the First Information Report cannot be a ground to doubt the case of the claimant. Human nature and family responsibilities occupy the mind of kith and kin to such an accident that they gi