SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(MP) 35

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Hirdesh, J.
Vijay Kumar Sharma S/o Ramgopal Sharma - Appellant
Vs.
Pradeep Kumar S/o Balaprasad Chourasiya - Respondent
Misc. Appeal No. 1096 of 2023
Decided On : 12-01-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shri Siddharth Gulatee Adv.
For the Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey Adv.

The presumption of guilt of the driver of the offending vehicle if a charge sheet is filed after investigation, and the shift of burden of proof to the appellant to prove the claimant's negligence.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation for injury - Section 173(1) - 6th MACT, Chhatarpur - [Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act] - The court discussed the liability of the appellant under the Motor Vehicles Act and the compensation awarded to the claimant for the injury caused by the offending vehicle. It highlighted the duty of the police to seize the vehicle in case of an accident and the presumption of guilt of the driver of the offending vehicle if a charge sheet is filed after investigation.

Fact of the Case:

The claimant suffered an injury in a motor accident involving the appellant's vehicle. The appellant denied the allegations and claimed that the claimant was negligent.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the driver of the offending vehicle was driving rashly and negligently, and the appellant failed to prove their defense. The court also upheld the compensation awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper.

Issues: The issues revolved around the liability of the appellant, the negligence of the parties involved, and the adequacy of the compensation awarded.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that if the police registers a case against the offending vehicle after investigation and files a charge sheet, the driver is presumed guilty. The burden of proof shifted to the appellant to prove the claimant's negligence, which they failed to do.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed as it lacked substance, and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was upheld.

ORDER :

1. This appeal has been filed by owner of the offending vehicle/appellant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act being aggrieved by the award dated 21.12.2022 passed by 6th MACT, Chhatarpur in MACC No.199/2021 whereby the Tribunal awarded a total sum of compensation of Rs. 2,90,244/-with interest of 6 percent per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization to the claimant by way of compensation on account of injury to Pradeep Kumar in the motor Accident which allegedly took place on 28.09.2020.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 28.09.2020, the claimant came to his house Maharajpur from Chhatarpur on motorcycle. One Sachin was sitting on the motorcycle at 04:15 pm when he reached in front of house of Rajesh Maheto, Gadi Malhara, he stopped his motorcycle. Then from the Gade Malhara side respondent No. 1, driving the offending vehicle JCB, bearing registration No. MP-16 DA0415 in rash and negligent manner dashed the claimant due to which claimant received injury on his body. He was taken to District Hospital Chhatarpur for treatment and Dr. Mukesh Prajapati informed Police Choki Campus Chhattarpur.

3. In the accident claimant received fracture in femur bone on the left hand and treated for long time. So he filed claim petition before the Tribunal for seeking compensation.

4. Appellant filed the written statement and denied all allegations and submitted that appellant’s vehicle has not caused any accident on date 28.09.2020. Respondent was riding his motorcycle in rashly and negligently and due to his negligence collided with the standing JCB of the appellant and that there is 100 percent negligence on the part of the claimant and there is no fault of the appellant and pray for dismissal of the claim petition.

5. Tribunal framed the issues and taking evidence of both the parties and accepted the claim petition and awarded Rs.2,90,244/- with 6 percent interest to the claimant.

6. Being aggrieved with such award, owner of the vehicle/appellant filed this appeal that the appellant’s vehicle has not caused any accident. Respondent was riding the motorcycle rashly and negligently and due to his negligence vehicle collided with the standing JCB of the appellant and there is 100 percent negligence on the part of the claimant. There is no fault on the part of the appellant and his vehicle, so he is not liable. On other hand he also submitted that Tribunal awarded higher side of the compensation and alternatively reduced the compensation.

7. Per-contra leaned counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondent/claimant contended that Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation and pray for rejection of the appeal.

8. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the claims Tribunal.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is no accident caused by the offending vehicle. Offending vehicle was implanted in the case. He submitted that according to the intimation sent by the District Hospital, Chhatarpur to Police Chowk, Chhatarpur there is no registration number of the vehicle and FIR was lodged after 20 days of the incident. So the FIR is delayed.

10. Considering the arguments and perusing the record, Ex. P. 3, intimation by the hospital sent to Police Chowki Hospital Campus Chhatarpur by the doctor in which it was mentioned that deceased was brought for treatment in hospital. He received injuries in road accident.

11. According to FIR Ex. P-2, police received this intimation and thereafter inquired the matter and found that a JCB of yellow colour without number dashed the motorcycle of the claimant by which the claimant received injury.

12. Thereafter, police inquired the matter and after investigation filed the charge sheet of the offending vehicle which was driven by Mukund Singh respondent No. 2.

13. It is settled principle that if police registers the case against the offending vehicle after investigation, files a charge sheet before Magistrate Cou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top