SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(P&H) 2342

AVNEESH JHINGAN
Jeetu Ram – Appellant
Versus
Surender – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants:Mr. Ajit Sihag, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. M.R. Verma, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Avneesh Jhingan, J.: (Oral) - The present appeal has been filed against the award dated 30.03.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (for short, ‘the Tribunal’).

2. The grievance of the appellants is that the Tribunal erred in dismissing the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the Act’).

3. The legal aspect of the issue in the present appeal is well settled that if a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act is filed, the onus is on the claimants to prove involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident and that the offending vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently.

4. In the present case, the Tribunal held that the claimants failed to prove involvement of the auto rickshaw bearing registration No. HR-61- 3668 (for short, ‘the offending vehicle’) in the accident. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are upheld for the reasons mentioned below.

5. The facts of the case are that on 17.04.2009 at about 9.30 PM, one Hardeva son of Chandgi Ram saw Ajmer lying injured near Talu minor and besides him, his Hero Honda motor cycle was also lying. Ajmer was taken to Government Hospital, Bhiwani. He was





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top