Advocates:
['TAMBE RAHUL A', 'DHANANJAY DESHPANDE', '', 'KARPE RAHUL R']

{1}

fa61119.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

FIRST APPEAL NO. 611 OF 2019

Zishan @ Mohammad Ismail Javed

Sayyad, age: 13 years, Occ: Education,

through Parental Guardian

Mr. Javed Suleman Sayyad,

age: 42 years, Occ: Business,

R/o Ward No. 2, Subhedar Wasti,

Shrirampur, Tq. Shrirampur,

District Ahmednagar.

Appellant

Versus

01 Vijay s/o Punjaajai Kolhe,

age: majaor, Occ: Business,

R/o Saraswati Colony,

Ward No.7, Shrirampur,

Tq. Shrirampur,

District Ahmednagar.

02 Branch Manager,

The New India Assurance

Co. Ltd., Offce at Parag Plaza,

Dr. Chutephale Marg,

Shivajai Cross Road,

Shrirampur, Tq. Shrirampur,

District Ahmednagar.

Respondents

Mr. R. A. Tambe, advocate for the Appellant

Mr. Y. H. Lagad, advocate holding for Mr. R. R. Karpe, advocate for

Respondent No.1.

Mr. Dhananajaay P. Deshpande, advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE J.

Reserved on

: 19^th August, 2022.

Pronounced on

: 19^th September, 2022.

JUDGMENT :

{2}

fa61119.odt

1

The appellant – Zishan @ Mohammad Ismail Javed

Sayyad, through his guardian – father Javed Suleman Sayyad, has

preferred this appeal against the jaudgment and award dated

06.04.2017, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Shrirampur, District Ahmednagar (herein after referred to

as “the learned Tribunal”) in M. A. C. P. No. 280 of 2012, whereby

claim of the appellant/claimant has been refused.

2

The background facts are as under:

On 09.06.2009, the appellant was present by the side

of the road along with his mother and brother. However, at the

relevant time, one Rizwan Rafq Shaikh, who was driving the

motorcycle bearing Registration No.MH-17-P-5390, recklessly gave

dash to the appellant wherein the appellant suffered severe head

injauries. The appellant was immediately taken to the hospital and

admitted there for 3/4 days for treatment and there was an

expenditure of Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- for his medical

treatment. The concerned Police Station registered an offence

against the driver of the said motorcycle. Present Respondent No.1

was the registered owner of the said offending motorcycle which

was insured with Respondent No.2 – Insurance Company covering

{3}

fa61119.odt

the date of the accident. The appellant, before the learned

Tribunal, claimed compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. However, the

learned

Tribunal

was

pleased

to

dismiss

the

Claim Petition by observing that the motorcycle rider, against

whom the concerned Police Station fled charge sheet, was not

driving the motorcycle at the relevant time and that the accident

took place as the appellant claimant himself was negligent.

3

The learned Counsel for the appellant-claimant

submits that the learned Tribunal drew its own inference by

ignoring the documentary evidence on record and erroneously held

that Rizwan was not driving the offending motorcycle at the time of

accident and that the appellant himself was negligent. He further

submits that though the First Information Report was lodged after

about two months of the accident by the father of the appellant-

claimant against one Riyan Umar Faruq, but subsequently during

investigation, it was found that Rizwan was driving the offending

motorcycle. However, still the learned Tribunal has ignored all

these things including the evidence of Rizwan, who himself had

stated that he was driving the offending motorcycle. He further

submits that the learned Tribunal also ignored evidence of

Investigating Offcer, who fled charge sheet against Rizwan since it