JUDGMENT :

KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for Insurance Company.

2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 28.11.1995 passed by Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal/VIII Additional District Judge, Etawah (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) in claim petition No. 76 of 1994.

3. The accident in question occurred on the fateful date when the young child of the appellant breathed last while being treated.

4. The Tribunal dismissed the claim petition on the ground that it was not proved that the motorcycle was involved in the accident. The fact that the driver was nabbed at the spot and he took the child to the hospital got admitted and that he was the owner of Hero Honda motor Cycle No. UP-78 E-6622, against whom the charge sheet is laid.

5. The principles for proving an accident are not as stringer as mentioned by the learned Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The filing of charge sheet would make the owner and driver are liable as it was prima-facie prove involvement of the vehicle. The judgment of Ajai Prakash vs. M/s National Insurance Company Limited and Others, (2010) 2 ALJ 1787 would come to