Dismissed

UOI.TH.529,ASC Bn v. Varinder Kumar and Ors.

J&K HC3 Jul 2020MA/78/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal dismissed. The High Court held that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal correctly dismissed the claim for vehicle damage because the appellant failed to produce and prove a bill for actual repair expenses, neither an estimate nor cogent evidence sufficing for compensation.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is devoid of merit and is dismissed; no compensation awarded for vehicle damage.

UOI.TH.529,ASC Bn Vs Varinder Kumar and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | J&K HC (2020)

¶1

Serial. No. 210

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU

¶3

MA No. 78/2016

¶4

Union of India, ASC BN

¶5

...Appellant(s)

¶6

Through:- Mr. Vishal Sharma, ASGI.

¶7

V/s

¶8

Varinder Kumar and others. ...Respondent(s)

¶9

Through:- None.

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This is an appeal filed by the Union of India against the judgment and order dated 10.02.2016 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udhampur (for short “the Tribunal”) whereby the claim petition preferred by the appellant has been dismissed for want of relevant evidence.

¶13

The impugned award has been assailed primarily on the ground that

¶14

the learned Tribunal has committed a serious error in not appreciating the evidence on record in proper perspective. It is submitted that not only the bill of estimated cost was placed on record, but the witness of the appellant appeared and also proved the said bill.

¶15

Having heard Mr. Vishal Sharma, learned ASGI appearing for the appellant and pursued the record, I am of the view that the Tribunal has committed no illegality in appreciating the evidence on record. The Tribunal has come to the correct conclusion that in absence of any evidence led by the

¶16

2 MA No. 78/2016

¶17

appellant to prove the actual damage suffered to the vehicle, it would not be possible for the Tribunal to award any compensation on account of damage caused to the vehicle of the appellant.

¶18

The Tribunal has rightly taken note of the fact that what was placed on record in the shape of evidence, was only the estimated cost to be incurred by the appellant in repairing the damaged vehicle and the bill with regard to the actual expenses incurred in repairing the damaged vehicle was neither brought on record, nor proved by leading any cogent evidence.

¶19

Given the nature of the evidence brought on record by the appellant and its failure to prove the actual cost incurred in repairing the vehicle, it is not possible for this Court to accede to the plea of the appellant.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid, it is very difficult for this Court to differ with

¶21

the view taken by the Tribunal. The appeal is devoid of merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶22

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge

JAMMU

03.07.2020

Shivalee

Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No

¶27

SHIVALEE KHAJURIA 2020.07.08 15:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

UOI.TH.529,ASC Bn v. Varinder Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

UOI.TH.529,ASC Bn v. Varinder Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Aziz Din

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sanju Raju and Ors.

Bakel Chand and Ors. Vs Vijay Kumar

National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Mohinder Singh and Ors.

National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Sanasr Chand and Ors.

M/S Aar Kay Enterprises Th Rakesh Kumar Sharma Jammu. Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir Th Chief Secretary and Others.