Dismissed

Hariom Son of Shri Chandan Singh, v. United India Insurance Company Limited

Rajasthan HC25 Aug 2022CMA/1345/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed an appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's judgment refusing compensation due to a 2019 accident. The court concurred with the Tribunal's findings that the appellant failed to prove the date of injury, faced contradictions in statements regarding the accident, and could not explain a 36-day delay in lodging the FIR.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed for lack of merit.

Hariom Son of Shri Chandan Singh, Vs United India… — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1345/2022

¶3

Hariom Son Of Shri Chandan Singh, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Village Rawatpura, Virondha, Police Station, Maniya, District Dholpur (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Dhoolkot Road, Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Insurance Company Of Vehicle).

¶7

Biharilal Son Of Shri Prem Singh, Ghadi Dubati Police Station, Dholpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Owner Of Vehicle).

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, Advocate

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA Judgment

¶11

25/08/2022

¶12

This Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellantclaimant (for short, ‘the claimant’) against the judgment dated 29.4.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dholpur (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in claim petition no. 19/2021, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant has been dismissed.

¶13

Facts of the case are that on 11.4.2019 at about 5.00 PM, claimant Hari Om was coming to his village from Dholpur on Motor Cycle. When he reached near village Bakayda school, a motor cycle no. RJ 11 / SE 4369 being driven by its driver rashly and negligently, hit Hari Om’s motor cycle, due to which the claimant sustained injuries, due to which the claimant sustained grievous injuries.

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CMA-1345/2022]

¶16

The claimant filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation due to the injuries sustained by him.

¶17

The non claimants flied their written submissions. It was averred that on the alleged date of accident, neither accident took place nor offending Motor Cycle No. RJ 11 / SE 4369 was insured by the Insurance Co. It was also averred that at the time of accident, the driver of the offending vehicle was not a valid and effective driving license.

¶18

On the basis of pleadings of the parties, necessary issues were framed and after hearing the arguments, the Tribunal vide its judgment dated 29.4.2022 has dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimant. Hence, this Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed.

¶19

Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the impugned judgment and award dated 29.4.2022 passed by the Tribunal is contrary to the material available on record. He further submits that the delay in lodging the FIR was properly explained. After thorough investigation, the investigating agency filed charge sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle. Thus, the impugned judgment is liable to be quashed and set-aside.

¶20

Heard. Considered.

¶21

From a perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that as per the prescription slip of Bohra Hospital (Ex. 46), the claimant remained admitted in the hospital from 12.4.2019 to 23.4.2019, but nothing was mentioned therein as to which part of the claimant’s body was operated. Further, the claimant was discharged from the hospital on 23.4.2019 and as per the claimant’s own averment, he went to the Doctor on 26.4.2019 and 10.5.2019 for further treatment, but despite that till 16.5.2019,

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

[CMA-1345/2022]

¶24

neither information was given to the police nor FIR was lodged by him. The accident took place on 11.4.2019, but prescription slip of the date of accident was not exhibited.

¶25

The Tribunal noted that it was not established that on the date of accident i.e. 11.4.2019, the claimant was admitted in any hospital. No prescription slip / operation note was available on record to show as to for which operation, the claimant remained admitted in Bohra Hospital from 12.4.2019 to 23.4.2019. The report with regard to the alleged accident was lodged after 36 days, for which no reasonable explanation was given. The claimant stated that there was no major male member in his family, but from Ex. NA 6 and 7, the Insurance Co. established that in the claimant’s family, his father, brother etc. are there. The Tribunal noted that there was material contradictions in the statement of witness AW-2 Hari and the claimant Hari Om and the vehicle was managed to be falsely involved in the alleged accident.

¶26

The findings recorded by the Tribunal are just and proper, with which I fully concur.

¶27

For the aforesaid reasons, I find no force in this appeal and the same being bereft of any merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly.

¶28

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶29

DK/22

Hariom Son of Shri Chandan Singh, v. United India Insurance Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hariom Son of Shri Chandan Singh, v. United India Insurance Company Limited

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

Nisha Verma D/O Late Shri Mool Chand Verma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Manju Preaveen W/O Late Shri Mohammad Tohid @ Shakeel Vs Jagseer Singh S/O Shri Jarnail Singh

The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Rupanti Devi Wife of Shri Harban Singh

Ashok Kumar S/O Shri Banwari Lal Vs Vivek Yadav S/O Ramvilas Yadav

Roshan Sutliya W/O Late Shri Ranjeet Singh Vs Future Generali India Insurance Company Ltd.

Mohammed Fareed S/O Abdul Sattar, Vs Smt. Firoza Bano W/O Zahid Ali D/O Kayyum Ali