HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1349/2022

Naresh Verman S/o Shri Okil Verman, Aged About 24 Years, R/o

Plot No. 59, Sector No. 7, Opposite Shipra Path, Police Station

Mansarovar, Jaipur (Raj.)

----Appellant

Versus

1.

Ashish Yadav S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav, R/o Aam Ki

Nadi, Pratap Nagar, Loha Khan, Ajmer (Raj.).

Vehicle Driver Car No. RJ27-CD-5708).

2.

Rajendra Kumar Bunkar S/o Shri Moolchand Bunkar, R/o

4/36, Behind Kelgiri Hospital, Jhalana Kachchi Basti,

Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)

Purchaser Owner Car No. RJ27-CD-5708).

3.

Naresh Godha, S/o Shri Vimal Chand Godha, Aged About

53 Years, R/o Plot No. 52, Ashok Nagar Main Road, Police

Station Gopalpura, Udaipur (Raj.) (Registered Owner

Vehicle Car No. RJ27-CD-5708).

----Respondents

For Appellant(s)

:

Mr. Satish Khandal, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

Judgment

05/07/2022

This Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellant-

claimant (for short, 'the claimant') against the judgment dated

24.11.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur

Metropolitan-I (for short, 'the Tribunal') in MAC Case No.

846/2017, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant has

been dismissed.

(2 of 4)

[CMA-1349/2022]

Facts of the case are that the claimant filed a claim

petition before the Tribunal, wherein it was averred that on

18.1.2017, the claimant was going on his motor cycle no. RJ 14

XD 5248 from Gaurav Tower to Mansarovar. Alongwith him his

known Heena and Tina were also sitting on the motor cycle. At

about 9.45 PM, when they reached at Reliance Fresh near Fortis

Hospital, a Car No. RJ 27 CD 5708 came from Girdhar Marg, being

driven by its driver rashly and negligently and hit the claimant's

motor cycle, due to which the claimant fell down and he sustained

fracture in right hand thigh.

The non claimants did not put in appearance, therefore,

ex-parte proceedings were drawn against them and no reply was

filed.

Necessary issues were framed. Evidence was led by the

claimant and after hearing the arguments, the Tribunal vide its

judgment dated 24.11.2021 has dismissed the claim petition filed

by the claimant. Hence, this Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed.

Learned counsel for the claimant submits that there

was sufficient evidence available on record to show that the

accident took place on 18.1.2017 in which the claimant sustained

22.70% permanent disability. He further submits that the

offending vehicle was un-insured and the respondents were ex-

parte before the Tribunal, therefore, the averments made by the

claimant remained uncontroverted. He further submits that after

investigating the matter, the police filed the charge sheet against

the respondent no.1. He further submits that if the offending

vehicle would have been insured, then it could have been the case

of false implication in order to get compensation, but in the

instant case, the offending vehicle was un-insured. A notice under

(3 of 4)

[CMA-1349/2022]

Section 133 of the MV Act was issued to the owner/driver of the

offending vehicle, which was duly replied, which clearly shows that

the accident took place by the offending vehicle, but without

considering the same, the Tribunal has dismissed the claim

petition.

Heard. Considered.

From a perusal of the material on record, it is noticed

that the accident took place on 18.1.2017 at 9.45 PM, whereas

the first information report of the accident was lodged on

20.1.2017, wherein offending vehicle Car No. RJ 14 CD 5708 was

mentioned, whereas in his statement recorded as AW-1, the

claimant disclosed the offending vehicle Car No. RJ 27 CD 5708.

Even in the application dated 30.3.2017 submitted to the

Incharge, Road Accident Investigation Unit, East Traffic Jaipur i.e.

after about 2 1/2 months from the date of accident, instead of Car

No. RJ 14 CD 5708, Car No. RJ 27