AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G.C. Garg, J.—This order will dispose of civil misc. 2838 CII of 1995, moved by the claimant/appellant. Claim petition filed by her was dismissed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karnal after recording a finding that the accident took place not on account of rash, negligent and careless driving of the truck by its driver but on account of rash, negligent and careless driving of car by its driver Sh. O.P. Tangri, husband of the appellant-claimant.
During the pendency of the appeal, claimant has moved this application u/s 140 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the payment of Rs. 50000/- as compensation.
Notice of the application was given to the respondents and they have put in appearance.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the prayer made in the application cannot be granted especially having regard to the view taken by the Madras High Court in K. Nandakumar v. The Managing Director, Thanthai, Periyar Transport Corporation Limited 1992 2 P.L.R. 6, Amita Baghi and Ors. v. Tejwinder Singh and ors. 1995 1 P.L.R. 284, and Rawat Singh and Anr. v. Sube Singh and Ors. 1995 1 P.L.R. 539, relied upon by the learned counsel for the Applicant-claimant do not help him and are clearly distinguishable on acts. Civil Misc. is consequently dismissed.