This judgment records an order dismissing a criminal revision appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The court condensed a delay in filing when its case was insanity.
Appeal dismissed. Interim relief, if any, vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 21
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 658 of 2002
Appellant :- State of U.P. Respondent :- Lakshmi Chand And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Standing Counsel
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
In Ref: Delay Condonation Application
This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Cause shown for the delay is sufficient, hence, the delay is condoned.
This application, accordingly stands allowed.
In Ref: Memo of Appeal
While going through the record, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the award and decree dated 08.02.2002 has been allowed in favour of the claimants by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lalitpur in M.A.C.P. No.26 of 1999. It is submitted that the accident did not take place with the Jeep No. UTV-5385. Though, there was entry in the G.D. of P.S. Pali that the jeep in question did not come out of the premises. Therefore, there was no question of involvement of the vehicle. The question is also under challenge that the injured did not get himself examined by the hospital.
The factual scenario is that on 29.01.1999 at about 11:00 am, when the injured was sitting near the Hair Arts shop, a jeep bearing No.UTV-5385 came rashly and negligently and dashed with the respondent. The accident was seen by many people. He was admitted in hospital and therefore he sent an FIR on 01.04.1999 through registered post. The appellant herein filed its reply and contended that Jeep was never driven and it was not on the road same date. The driver has given the concurrent finding that the FIR bearing its number was sent to the I.G. of Police. The driver of the said vehicle has denied that the accident took place. That whenever, the vehicle is driven out a G.D. entry is always there. The learned Tribunal has believed all the eye-witnesses PW1, PW2 and PW3 special Rajkumar Jain. Hence, not to believe that the vehicle was involved in the accident would be against the record.
Hence, this appeal is dismissed.
Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated.
Order Date :- 16.12.2021 Ashutosh Pandey
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award should be allowed or dismissed.
Whether the merit of the appeal concerning vehicle involvement and injury exam was considered.
State of U.P.
Lakshmi Chand And Another
Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
