driving of the driver of Jeep bearing registration No. RJ-25-C1052. Later, Jeep bearing registration No. RJ-01-C-0214 was found to be involved in this case. However, there is no explanation or material on record to establish as to how the claimants came to know that the Jeep bearing registration No. RJ-01-C-0214 instead of RJ-25-C-1052 had caused the accident. The lodger of FIR was also travelling on the motorcycle which had met with an accident with the offending Jeep. In these circumstances, claimants were required to examine Madan Mohan as a witness before the Tribunal. The said witness could have explained as to why he had given an incorrect Jeep number, at the time of lodging of the FIR and how, he came to know that number of the offending Jeep was a different one than the one disclosed by him in the FIR. The owner as well as the Insurance Company of the offending vehicle would have got the opportunity to cross-examine Madan Mohan. Madan Mohan is one of the claimants and could have easily appeared in the witness box to dispose with regard to the manner of accident. Hence, an adverse inference is liable to be drawn against the claimants.
