MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
U.C.Maheshwari, J.
Asha - Appellant
Versus
Abbu Shahna & Ors. - Respondent
M.A. No. 2125-1999
Decided On : 10-01-2011
Motor Vehicle Act - Compensation Claim - Lack of Evidence
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed a claim petition for compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act, stating that she sustained injuries in a vehicular accident due to rash and negligent driving of the truck. The tribunal dismissed the claim due to lack of evidence from both parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the tribunal did not commit any error in dismissing the claim, as settled law dictates that mere pleadings without evidence cannot lead to a claim being awarded or decreed.
Issues: The main issue was the lack of evidence to support the appellant's claim for compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that in the absence of evidence, mere pleadings cannot lead to the award or decree of a claim, as per settled legal principles.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
JUDGMENT :
U.C. Maheshwari, J.1. On behalf of the appellant claimant, this appeal is preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, in short "The Act" being aggrieved by the award dated 31.8.1999 passed by the Ist Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Katni in MACT No. 127/93 dismissing her claim of compensation filed with respect of the injuries sustained in the vehicular accident.
2. The appellant herein filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the aforesaid Act contending that in the intervening night of 13.5.1989 to 14.5.1989, the applicant alongwith others were travelling in the offending truck bearing registration no. BRD -5068 alongwith their booked luggage looking after the same. On the way of their destination said vehicle was turned turtle in which some of the passengers died while the appellant had sustained sum injuries. She was taken to hospital where her MLC report was prepared. On registration of the crime after holding investigation the respondent no. 1- Driver of the Vehicle was charge sheeted for the alleged offence under Section 304, 337, 338 of IPC. It is also pleaded that such accident took place because of rash and negligent driving of aforesaid truck by respondent no.1. With these averments stating the description of the injuries on behalf of appellant the present claim is preferred for the compensation of Rs.40,800/- and also for the interest on the same.
3. The respondent no. 1 and 2 Driver and registered owner of the registered vehicle proceeded ex-parte in the Tribunal while in the written statement of respondent no. 3 -Insurer by denying the averments of the claim petition the prayer for dismissal of the claim petition is made.
4. After framing the issues opportunity to adduce evidence was extended to the appellant but it appears from the record that no such evidence is adduced by either of the parties in support of the petition as well as in defence. Keeping in view such aspect, on consideration the claim petition was dismissed by the Tribunal holding that the appellant has failed to prove the alleged accident and also the injuries sustained by her in the said accident. Being dissatisfied with such dismissal of the claim, the appellant has come forward to this court with this appeal.
5. The appellant's counsel by referring the pleadings of the claim petition said that the provision for compensation of the claim under the Motor Vehicle Act is enacted for welfare of the person who suffered injuries or losses in the vehicular accident and in view of pleadings of the claim petition, it is apparent that the appellant has sustained the alleged injuries in the vehicular accident and such alleged offending vehicle was duly ensured with the respondent no. 3 and in such premises, even in the absence of examination of any witness on behalf of the appellant in support of the claim petition, the Tribunal ought to have awarded her claim and prayed to award the claim, by allowing this appeal. He fairly conceded that in support of the pleadings of the claim petition, no evidence has been adduced on behalf of the appellant as such next friend and guardian of the appellant has also not been examined in the matter.
6. The aforesaid prayer is opposed by the counsel for Insurer saying that in view of the settled preposition of law, in the lack of evidence mere on the basis of pleadings, no claim or the suit could be awarded or decreed, hence the Tribunal has not committed any error in dismissing the claim of the appellant. In such premises, he argued that impugned award dismissing the claim of the appellant does not require any interference at this stage and prayed for dismissal of this appeal.
7. Having heard the counsel, keeping in view their arguments, after perusing the record, in the available circumstances, I am of the considered view that the Tribunal has not committed any error or perversity in dismissing the claim of the appellant. It is settled proposition of law that in the lack of pleadings mere o
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.