ORDER :

(Ashutosh Kumar, J.)

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant - Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'RSRTC') under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1973 against the judgment and award dated 10.06.2009 passed by Judge, Special Court (Communal Riots/Motor Accident Claim Tribunal), Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in MACT Case No.537/2008 (520/2005), whereby the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition filed by the respondent No.1 - Kaluram (hereinafter referred to as the 'claimant') and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,65,000/- in favour of the claimant.

2. Brief facts relevant for the present purposes are that Moolchand, brother of the claimant (Kaluram) submitted a written complaint before SHO, Sadar, Sanganer stating therein that his brother - Kaluram was going on his motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ-14-51M-0013 to Sanagner on 12.11.2004 at 4.30 p.m. A Roadways Bus bearing registration No.RJ-14-P-6727 came from the opposite side in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the motorcycle of his brother, due to which his brother sustained serious injuries. Soon after the accident Kaluram was admitted in Dhanwantari Hospital, Jaipur. It was also stated by brother of the injured - Mool Chand that he was busy in attending his injured brother (Kaluram) in the hospital. Therefore, he could not submit the report earlier.

3. On the said report, an FIR No.457/2004 was lodged at Police Station Sanaganer Sadar, Jaipur for the offences punishable under Section 279 and 337 of IPC and after investigation a charge-sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle was filed for the offences punishable under Sections 279 , 337 and 338 of IPC.

4. Thereafter, injured - Kaluram submitted a claim petition against the driver of the offending vehicle and RSRTC claiming compensation of Rs.21,10,000/- because he had incurred permanent disability.

5. The non-claimant - driver of the offending vehicle did not file reply to the claim petition. The appellant - RSRTC filed its reply and stated that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the claimant himself alleging that the claimant himself slipped and got injured. The RSRTC averred that there is no involvement of the bus of appellant - RSRTC in the said accident. It was prayed that claim petition be dismissed.

6. After taking evidence on record the learned Tribunal passed the impugned judgment and award. Hence, the present appeal.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal has not considered the fact that FIR of the case was lodged belatedly and that too without giving any reason.

8. It was submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the claimant was riding negligently on his motorcycle, he himself slipped on the road and got injured. The appellant averred that the driver of the offending vehicle was not at all negligent in driving of the bus of the appellant. It was also submitted that learned Tribunal has erred in considering the disability certificate in favour of the claimant, as the certificate has not duly been proved since no doctor was examined for proving it.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the claimant was under treatment in one hospital whereas the disability certificate has been issued by the doctors of some different hospital.

10. It was also contended that the learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the claimant on higher side without any justifiable reason. Therefore, the appeal be allowed and the impugned judgment and award be quashed and