Back
HIRDESH
Malini – Appellant
Versus
Amit – Respondent
ORDER
1. This appeal by the claimant under section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act is arising out of the award dated 8.7.2008 passed by 13th Additional MACT, Indore in claim case No.44/2007 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 12.1.2004 at 10.15 a.m appellant /claimant with her son was going to Nirmal hospital, Indore on a motor cycle. His sons was riding the motor cycle and she was sitting behind the motor cycle. When they reached near Kalani nagar, Nirmal hospital then a scooter bearing registration no.MP-09-JP-0346 which was being driven by respondent No.1 rashly and negligently hit the motorcycle due to which she fell down and received injuries on her left hand and suffered fracture. She was admitted in Nirmal hospital Indore and discharged from the hospital on 13.1.2004. She filed a claim petition against the driver and owner of the offending vehicle. She received 17% permanent disability.
3. Respondents/driver and owner/insurance company of the offending vehicle filed their written statement. Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings of the parties framed issues and recorded evidence of both parties. Tribunal after he
The court established that discrepancies in vehicle identification in an FIR do not invalidate a claim if police investigations confirm the actual offending vehicle.
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.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
