IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that for claims of negligence in motor vehicle accidents, the burden of proof lies on the claimants to demonstrate the driver's fault, and the admissibility of electronic evidence must comply with statutory requirements.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

1. Heard Mr. H. Buragohain, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant and Mr. S. Dutta, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Upamanyu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

2. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 15.05.2019 passed in MAC Case No. 168/2017.

3. The primary grounds of objection on which the instant appeal has been based is on two grounds:

(I) The learned Tribunal erred in law as well as on facts in coming to a finding that the death of Late Nitul Medhi was on account of the rash and negligent manner of riding of the motor cycle bearing Registration No. AS-15/E-4251 inasmuch as the learned Trial Court did not appreciate the Exhibit-B to Exhibit-F which would show that the deceased met with an accident while riding his own motor cycle.

(II) The learned Tribunal while computing the just and reasonable compensation had failed to take into account that the income of the deceased was an income derived from a partnership business which continued after the death of the deceased and as such, the Claimants continued to earn benefits from the said business which was not taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal.

4. In the backdrop of the above grounds of objections, let this Court take note of the relevant facts of the case. It was the case of the Claimants that on the evening of 16.02.2017, the deceased Late Nitul Medhi was proceeding on foot towards his residence from Pathsala through the N.H. No. 152 and when the deceased reached a place called Halgirighat, a motor cycle bearing Registration No. AS-15/E-4251 hit/struck the deceased which led to critical/serious injuries being suffered by Late Nitul Medhi who ultimately succumbed to his injuries after 5 (five) days of treatment i.e. on 21.02.2017 at the GNRC Hospital, Guwahati. In view of the said accident followed by the death of Late Nitul Medhi the said claim proceedings being MAC Case No. 168/2017 was filed.

5. The Opposite Party No. 1 in the said proceedings who was the owner of the registered motor cycle bearing Registration No. AS-15/E-4251 filed a written statement. In the said written statement, there was no denial that the motor cycle bearing Registration No. AS-15/E-4251 had not caused the accident. It was stated that the O.P. No. 2 who had a valid driving license was riding the offending motor cycle in question. It was however denied that there was any rash and negligent driving by the driver/owner of the offending motor cycle in question. In the said written statement, it was stated that the offending motor cycle was duly insured with United India Insurance Company Ltd. vide Policy No. 1306833116P107835491 for the period from 15.09.2016 to 14.09.2017 and the accident occurred on 16.02.2017.

6. The O.P. No. 2 had also filed a written statement. It was denied that there was rash and negligent driving of the offending motor cycle by the O.P. No. 2. There was no denial of the accident being caused by the offending motor cycle. It was however stated that the O.P. No. 2 had a valid driving license and the vehicle in question was duly insured with United India Insurance Company Ltd.

7. The O.P. No. 3 i.e. the United India Insurance Company Ltd. i.e. the Appellant herein filed a written statement denying that on 16.02.2017 at 6:05 PM, the deceased Late Nitul Medhi sustained injury in a vehicular accident near village Bhutanta Mahitara on 152 No. National Highway and he succumbed to his injuries on 21.02.2017 at 7 AM. A further perusal of the said written statement shows that the usual defences were taken to the effect thereby denying the age of the victim, the occupation of the victim, the expenditure incurred by the claimants for treating the victim. It is pertinent herein to mention that in the said written statement, there was no statement or allegation made that the alleged accident had occurred with the involvement of a motor cycle bearing Registration No. AS