AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Appellant has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 07.04.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby, claim petition filed by
respondent No.1 claiming compensation on account of injuries suffered by him, was allowed.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has erred in allowing the claim petition filed by respondent No.1. In-fact, the
accident had occurred in the night on 14.05.1999 and 15.05.1999. It was reported to the police station Pragpura by Shyam Lal that he was driver of
truck bearing No.RJA 3417 and the same had met with an accident as a Blue bull had suddenly come on the road. However, no person sitting in the
truck had suffered injuries. However, the beer bottles loaded in the truck had been damaged. Thereafter, FIR was got registered by respondent No.1
in the year 2001 alleging that he was driving the truck bearing No.RJA 3417 on 14.05.1999 after loading it. At about 3.30 A.M., he had parked the
truck by the side of the road and was sitting in the truck. In the meantime, truck bearing No. DL-1G-1686 came from Kotputli side and stuck against
his truck. As a result, he suffered injuries. The offending vehicle had been later falsely involved in this case by respondent No.1 by putting up a
concocted and a false version.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has opposed the appeal and has submitted that respondent No.1 had been successful in proving his case.
Respondent No.1 had suffered injuries in the accident in question.
Respondent No.1 had filed the claim petition seeking compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicle accident, which had
occurred on 15.05.1999 at 3.30 A.M.
Exhibit-6 is the complaint moved by respondent No.1 before the Magistrate under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the
driver of truck No. DL-1G-1686. The said complaint was filed on 06.03.2000. On the basis of the said complaint, FIR Exhibit-1 was registered on
14.04.2001. It was the case of respondent No.1 that on 14.05.1999, he was driving truck bearing No. RJA 3417 and had started from Neemrana after
loading the truck at about 11.30-12.00 O'clock noon. At about 3.30 A.M. on 15.05.1999, he had parked the truck by the side of the road near Mata
Sundari Devi hospital, Pawta. In the meantime, truck bearing No. DL-1G-1686 came from Kotputli side. The said truck was being driven in a rash and
negligent manner and struck against his truck. As a result, he suffered injuries and was removed to the hospital.
Exhibit-23 is the report recorded at police station Pragpura on 15.05.1999. A perusal of the same reveals that the said report was recorded on the
statement of Shyam Lal. It is not mentioned therein that the claimant was also travelling in the vehicle. It was the case of the informant that he was
driving truck No.RJA 3417 and he had started from Behror on 14.05.1999. A 'Blue Bull' suddenly came on the road and as a result, the truck struck
against a tree. The beer bottles loaded in the truck were damaged. However, nobody had suffered injuries.
Thus, there is a variation in the initial report Exhibit-23 and FIR Exhibit-1 with regard to the manner of accident and the person, who was driving the
offending vehicle.
In order to prove his case, claimant himself appeared in the witness box as AW-1.
Shyam Lal appeared in the witness box as AW-3. In his examination-in-chief, AW-3 corroborated the version given by the claimant, but in his cross-
examination, he admitted that the vehicle in question was presently with him and was being driven by some other driver. He had lodged report Exhibit-
23.
Thus, the lodger of report Exhibit-23 had admitted that he had lodged the report Exhibit-23. The said version was the initial version with regard to the
accident in question. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the delay in lodging the FIR by the claimant gains significance.
As per Exhibit-7, claimant had been admitted in the hospital on 15.05.1999 and was discharged on 18.05.1999. However, complaint Exhibit-6 was
moved by the claimant before the Court in March 2000. So far as the medico legal examination report of the claimant Exhibit-2 is concerned, the same
was prepared on 17.04.2001. Exhibit-3 X-ray report is also dated 17.04.2001. As per Exhibit-22 disability certificate, claimant had remained admitted
in the hospital from 15.05.1999 and was discharged on 18.05.1999 and got treatment in the OPD from 19.05.1999 to 20.08.1999. Despite the said fact
that the complaint Exhibit-6 was moved by the appellant in March 2000. There is no cogent explanation with regard to the delay in lodging the FIR.
In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the delay in lodging the FIR as well as the fact that a different version forms part of Exhibit-23
initial report with regard to the accident and Exhibit-1 FIR, it is evident that the claimant had not suffered injuries on account of rash and negligent
driving of respondent No.2 Ishrar Ahmed while driving the offending vehicle. It appears that the claimant had filed the claim petition by falsely
involving the offending vehicle to get compensation.
In the facts and circumstances of the present case, learned Tribunal fell in error in deciding issue No.1 in favour of the claimant. Accordingly, finding
of the Tribunal on issue No.1 is reversed and the said issue is decided against the claimant and in favour of the appellant/respondent No.2. In view of
the finding on issue No.1, the claim petition filed by respondent No.1 was liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. Impugned award dated 07.04.2004 passed by the Tribunal is set aside. Consequently, the claim petition filed by
respondent No.1 Narendra Kumar is dismissed.