High CourtsSingle Bench(2016) 02 RAJ CK 0145

Sitaram Sharma vs Ramji Lal Meena

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 16 February 2016 · Citation: (2016) 3 WLN 511

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mr. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2422 of 2005

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 248 words

Mr. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.—The present appeal has been filed to assail the award dated 31.5.2005, whereby the Tribunal awarded Rs.22,000/- for damages caused to the Jeep of the appellant.

2.

It is not denied by the learned counsel for the parties that on 23.2.1998, an accident took place between Jeep bearing Registration No. RSZ 495 and Tata Sumo bearing Registration No. RJ 14 2C 8389. The Tribunal assessed the damages caused to the Jeep as Rs.44,000/-. Thereafter, the Tribunal returned finding that it is a case of contributory negligence and thus, the Tribunal deducted 50% amount towards contributory negligence and awarded Rs.22,000/-, as compensation.

3.

The learned counsel for the appellant has only assailed the finding whereby the Tribunal held that it is a case of contributory negligence.

4.

The Tribunal examined the site plan Exhibit-2, considered visual observations noted by the Investigating Officer in the criminal case. Having minutely examined the site plan, the Tribunal held that the occurrence took place in middle of the road when both the vehicles had collided. The Tribunal further held that the witnesses of both sides have put the blame on each other. Restricting the mode of accident, relying upon the site plan Exhibit-2, the Tribunal has rightly observed that both the parties were responsible and hence, it is a case of contributory negligence.

5.

In view of well reasoned finding returned by the Tribunal, no interference is warranted and the present appeal being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.