Back
ALKA SARIN
Bhupender – Appellant
Versus
Krishan Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claimant's injury from vehicular accident. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dispute over facts and allegations in claims. (Para 3 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. evidence evaluation regarding negligence. (Para 5 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. appeal dismissed; tribunal's ruling upheld. (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
Alka Sarin, J.
The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellant aggrieved by the award dated 16.08.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) dismissing his claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for grant of compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident.
2. Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the claimant-appellant filed a claim petition averring therein that on 29.04.2011, he along with Om Parkash and Mahender Singh was going towards Narnaul from his Village Gehli on a three-wheeler bearing registration No.HR-66-8055. The said three-wheeler was driven by Mahender Singh at a moderate speed by observing traffic rules and at about 7:30 am when they reached near Sainio Ki Dhani near Canal, Singhana Road, Narnaul, a TATA 407 four-wheeler bearing registration No.RJ-1
A claimant must provide credible evidence to establish liability and causation in a motor vehicle accident; registration of FIR alone is insufficient.
The claimant must prove the occurrence of the accident and the negligence of the driver to succeed in a compensation claim, which was not established in this case.
Claimants in proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, have to prove their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
