Mushtaq Ahmad VS Riyaz Khan

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, AJAI TYAGI
Mushtaq Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
Riyaz Khan – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Anju Shukla, Nigamendra Shukla.
For the Respondent: Sudhanshu Behari Lal Gour, A.K. Sinha.

JUDGMENT :

Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.

1. Heard Sri Nigamendra Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Amitanshu Gour, learned Advocate, appearing for Sri S.B.L. Gour, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and award dated 20.2.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.2, Bulandshahr (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claim Case No.246 of 1999 awarding a sum of Rs.2,90,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6%.

3. It is an admitted position of fact that the accident occurred on 28.5.1999. The claim petition was filed under Sections 163 A, 166 & 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). The evidence was led and only in the year 2007 the claimants deleted Section 166 and 140 of the Act which was much after the evidence was recorded. Only heading of section was corrected and nothing was corrected in the body of the claim petition, namely, income of the deceased was Rs.6,000/-per month and the monetary loss claimed was Rs.20,000/- which was beyond the scope of Section 163A of the Act. After the pleadings