AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C.R. Kumaraswamy, J.—This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed u/s 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 21.07.2011 passed in MVC No. 233/2009 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and MACT, Maddur, dismissing the claim petition for compensation. With the consent of the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondents, this matter was heard on merits. The records are also called for and I have perused the same.
Learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the impugned judgment and award may be set-aside and the matter may be remitted back to the Claims Tribunal.
The Claims Tribunal has dismissed the petition. PSI of K.M. Doddi police has stated that they have inspected KA-02/Q7635 motorcycle with gear at K.M. Doddi police station. When concerned police can issue such endorsement it is probable that he was having no difficulty to issue IMV Report. However no such report is forthcoming before the Court. The driver of said motorcycle, who drove the same in a rash and negligent manner was unable to discover from the materials placed before this Court. Admittedly, there is a delay in lodging the complaint and discrepancies in the oral testimony of PW 1 and documents relied upon by him. The respondent No. 1 though shown as owner of motorcycle no material is placed in this regard. On the other hand, insurance policy is standing in the name of one Krishnegowda against whom no claim is made by the petitioner. Under such circumstances, it is crystal clear that the petitioner has not at all discharged his primary burden and he has not established before this Court that the accident took place due to negligent driving of motorcycle, which belongs to first respondent.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the delay in lodging the complaint will not wipe out the crime and it is not a ground to reject the claim petition. Ex. P. 9 is the copy of IMV report wherein K.M. Doddi police has issued the details regarding the accident. She will make Krishnegowda as party to the claim petition and she will also produce the documents before the Claims Tribunal. The Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition mainly on the ground that there was a delay in lodging the complaint. In my view, it is not proper and it is liable to be set-aside. Besides the other side has no objection to remit the matter back to the claims tribunal, therefore, the matter is remitted back to the Claims Tribunal.
The Claims Tribunal shall dispose of the matter afresh on merits as expeditiously as possible. Both the parties will have liberty to adduce the evidence, if they so desire. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that she will make Krishnegowda as party to the claim petition. Therefore, in case if any application is filed for impleading Krishnegowda as party to the claim petition, the same may be disposed of by the Claims Tribunal in accordance with law.
With these observations, this Miscellaneous First Appeal is disposed of.