evidence had been let in to prove that P.W.1 was admitted as an inpatient in any hospital. It is seen from scrutiny of Ex.P1, that he underwent treatment at Kilpauk Medical Hospital, but no mention has been made in the O.P.chit, to show the date of accident and date of treatment. The Tribunal further observed that P.W.1 has also not filed the wound certificate issued by the 0medical officer. Though it had been stated in the F.I.R. that the driver of the auto admitted him in the hospital, the Tribunal observed that the petitioner had not examined the driver of the auto to prove the occurrence of accident. The Tribunal further observed on scrutiny of Ex.P7, that in the charge sheet, an independent witness by name of G.Damodaran has been noted as the eyewitness of the accident and that the petitioner had not examined the said Damodaran to prove the occurrence and manner of accident. Hence, the Tribunal, on scrutiny of oral and documentary evidence held that the petitioner has not proved that the auto bearing registration No.TSJ-9696 caused the accident and as such, held that there cannot be any claim against the first and second respondents, who are the owner and insurer and hence, dismissed the claim.
