This appeal is filed by the claimants being aggrieved

by the judgment dated 24.12.2021 passed by the IV Addl.

District

Judge

and

MACT-V,

Belagavi,

in

M.V.C.

No.721/2020 wherein the Tribunal has dismissed the claim

petition.

2.

Brief facts giving rise to filing of this appeal are

that the appellants/claimants being wife, son, daughter

- 3 -

and mother of the deceased Sri Sadiq Kochargi have filed

claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act,

1988 seeking compensation for the death of

Sri. Sadiq

Kochargi

in the road accident that took place on

22.02.2019. It is averred that on

22.02.2019 the

deceased

was

returning

back

to

Chikkodi

on

his

motorcycle bearing No.MH-14/BB-495 and while passing

through Rathod Petrol Pump, one Bharat Benz Tanker

bearing No.KA-23/B-1791 came behind in a rash and

negligent manner and dashed to ongoing motorcycle of the

deceased. Due to the said impact, the rider of the

motorcycle thrown on road and sustained fatal injuries.

Immediately he was shifted to PHC Chikkodi and then to

KLE Hospital, Belagavi. During the course of treatment,

the injured died due to the accidental injuries. It is further

averred that the claimants have spent Rs.2,00,000/- for

the treatment of the deceased. It is also averred that as

the claimants were taking care of the victim, they could

not file any complaint, however, in the meantime, a false

complaint has been filed in connection with the accident

- 4 -

alleging that the victim himself fell down from the

motorcycle due to his rash and negligent riding of

motorcycle. It is also averred that the deceased was hale

and healthy, working as Supervisor under contractor and

earning

Rs.25,000/-

p.m.

Hence,

sought

for

compensation.

3.

The

respondent

No.1

remained

exparte.

Respondent No.2 entered appearance and filed objections

denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is

averred that the accident had occurred due to self fall of

the deceased from the motorcycle. The vehicle bearing

No.KA-23/B-1791 has not dashed the motorcycle as

alleged in the claim petition, the rider of the motorcycle

had no valid driving licence at the time of accident and did

not wear helmet. Hence, sought for dismissal of the claim

petition.

4.

The Tribunal framed the issues and recorded

the evidence of the parties. The 1st appellant/wife of the

deceased examined herself as PW-1 and one witness was

- 5 -

examined as PW-2 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-22. The

Insurance Company examined RW-1 and got marked

documents at Exs.R-1 and R-2. The Tribunal based on the

material evidence available on record, dismissed the claim

petition. Hence, the claimants are before this Court.

5.

Learned counsel Sri Kamate S.R. for appellant-

claimants submits that the Tribunal has failed to

appreciate the evidence on record in its proper perspective

and rejected the claim petition. It is submitted that the

Tribunal has committed an error in disbelieving the crucial

evidence of PW-2, who is charge sheeted witness, on the

sole ground that he did not inform the accident to

anybody. The Tribunal has committed an error in relying

on Ex.P-2, complaint lodged by one alleged witness

without looking into other evidence available on record. It

is further submitted that the Tribunal has recorded finding

that Bharat Benz bearing No.KA-23/B-1791 not at all

dashed hind portion of the motorcycle and the deceased

has not suffered injuries due to the said dash or Tanker

- 6 -

but it is due to self fall. The said observation of the

Tribunal is erroneous and contrary to the evidence on

record. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has recorded

the finding that the appellants have failed to prove that

due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing KA-

23/B-1791 the accident has caused, without appreciating

the evidence of PW-2 and Ex.P-22 wherein the entire

incident has been narrated. He seeks to allow the appeal

by setting aside the impugned judgment of the Tribunal.

6.

Per contra, learned counsel Sri M.K.