Skip to main content

Where no witness forthcoming, court has to believe the claimant - Motor Accident Tribunal

In case of compensation claims for road accidents, it is difficult to produce eyewitnesses as evidence as they are reluctant to depose in court. So the court has to believe the oath of the claimant. Making this observation, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal directed the insurer and owner of a lorry to pay 15.21 lakh to the parents of an engineering student who died in an accident in 2007.

In their submissions to the tribunal, Udipi Ramesh Rao, of Anna Nagar, said that on August 11, 2007, his son Adithya Rama Rao was riding pillion on a two-wheeler near GNT Road when a lorry, driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the vehicle. He died on the spot.

Adithya, a student of Velammal Engineering College, was returning home after attending classes. As such the owner and the insurer of the vehicle were "vicariously and statutorily liable to pay compensation," said the petition. Denying the claim, New India Insurance Co Ltd said the owner of the vehicle did not report the accident to the company.

The parents had to prove the lorry was involved in the accident, the firm said. There was no negligence on part of the lorry driver and the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist, they said, adding that there were no witnesses to prove the rash driving of the driver.

Sub-judge J Chandran said Rao had produced sufficient documentary evidence like the FIR, rough sketch, death report, post-mortem report and inquest report which proved the lorry driver was responsible for the accident. "It is settled by law that documentary evidence prevails oral evidence," said the tribunal.

It then directed the lorry driver and insurer to pay 12.96 lakh for loss of dependency to the family, 2 lakh for loss of love and affection to the parents and 25,000 as funeral expenses.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Lorry-owner-insurer-told-to-pay-Rs-15-lakh-to-kin-of-dead-student/articleshow/40023971.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...
1 comment
Read more

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...
1 comment
Read more