AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
. Heard.
By way present appeal, the appellant who is brother of deceased challenged the judgment and order passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Claim Petition No.276/2001 decided on 04.11.2006, on the ground that learned Tribunal has committed an error by denying the compensation to him.
The deceased was a Footwear Vendor and used to sell Footwear in the weekly market of villages. On 24.01.2001, when he was travelling from Karanja to Kondali, for attending the weekly market, accident occurred on National Highway No.6 at around 11.30 a.m. In the said accident, the deceased caused to death.
The mother of the deceased i.e. the respondent No.2 and the father of the deceased filed the proceedings for getting compensation under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Nagpur. In the said proceedings, the present appellant was not initially impleaded as one of the claimants in the matter. The record depicts the fact that during the pendency of the claim petition, the father i.e. Vasudev Sonbarse was expired and, thereafter, the present appellant was joined as an applicant in the claim petition.
Before the claim Tribunal, only mother of the deceased, entered into the witness box and stated that she was the only dependent of her unmarried son. There is no whisper on her part that present appellant was also one of the dependents of the deceased.
It is an admitted fact that present appellant did not enter into the witness box nor place any document on record to establish the fact to demonstrate that as to how he was dependent on the income of deceased. In absence of any documentary evidence placed on record, the learned Tribunal by holding that the appellant being an elder brother denied the compensation in his favour.
In the appeal, an attempt has been made to point out that present appellant was the dependent on his younger brother. It is stated in the appeal that both were residing together at the time of accident. However, at the appellate stage, in absence of any evidence available on record, such statement or submission cannot be accepted by this Court.
It was necessary for the appellant to establish before the Claim Tribunal that deceased was residing with him and appellant has no earning source, therefore, he was totally dependent on the deceased’s earnings. As I stated earlier, no evidence nor any document is available on record to substantiate this fact. At appellate stage, such a statement without any evidence cannot be accepted in the matter. Hence, I do not find any merit in the present appeal, accordingly the appeal stands dismissed.
No order as to the costs.