Negligence in motor accident compensation cases may be established through credible witness testimony and pending criminal charges, overriding initial inadequacies in FIR details.

JUDGMENT :

Sudeepti Sharma, J.

The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 13.01.2007 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar (for short, 'the Tribunal'), vide which the claim petition filed by the appellant/claimant was dismissed.

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 25.08.2003, at about 4.00 p.m., claimant/appellant was driving his motor cycle No. HR-20-H-8056 to Bus Stand Petrol Pump for obtaining petrol. When he reached near Punjab National Bank, Talaki Gate, Hisar, a motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-20-H-0347 came from the back side of the claimant/appellant being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner hit against the motorcycle of the claimant/appellant. As a result of impact, claimant/appellant fell down and suffered injuries including fractures. He was taken to Sewak Sabha Hospital, Hisar from where he was shifted to Balaji Hospital, Hisar where he was treated and operated by the doctors.

3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents appeared and denied the factum of accident/compensation.

4. From the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:-

1. Whether the accident resulting into injuries to claimant was on account of rash and negligent driving of motorcycle bearing No. HR-20-H-0347 by respondent No.1 as alleged? OPP

2. Whether the claimant is entitled to get compensation. If so, to what amount? OPP

3. Whether the petition is based on collusion in between the petitioner and respondent No. 1. If so to what effect? OPR(2)

4. Whether the driver was not holding valid and effective driving license, if so to what effect? OPR 2

5. Relief.

5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal dismissed the claim-petition. Hence the present appeal.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

6. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned Tribunal did not appreciate the evidence on record and wrongly dismissed the claim petition only on the ground that the appellant failed to prove that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle driven by respondent No. 1. He, therefore, prays that the present appeal be allowed.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-insurance Company, however, vehemently argues that the claim petition has rightly been dismissed. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case.

9. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to reproduce the relevant portion of the award, which reads as under:-

'Issue No. 1. 10 To discharge his burden the claimant Rajbir appeared as PW5 and deposed that on 25.08.2003 he was going to petrol pump near bus stand to take petrol by his motor cycle bearing registration No.HR-20-H-8056. When he was at some distance from Punjab National Bank, Hisar another motor cycle hit his motor cycle from back side, due to which he fell down and received multiple injuries including the fracture of right leg. The another motorcycle was being driven at high speed. After the accident he was taken to Sewak Sabha Hospital as no doctor was available there so he was taken to Balaji Hospital, Hisar, where he remained admitted at for about 15 days and he spent Rs. 1,00,000 at that time including costs of medicines, hospital charges, special diet etc. He lodged FIR about this accident, copy of which is Ex. Pl.

11. Mukesh Kumar Criminal Ahlmad in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar as PW2 in his statement has proved the