This appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award challenging the legal status of the deceased's wife to claim compensation was dismissed. The court held that the Tribunal's findings on evidence were just and proper.
The appeal is dismissed.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 956/2018
----Appellants
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. J.K. Yogi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Digvijay Mantri
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
JUDGMENT
The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants proforma-non claimants (for short ’the non-claimants’) aggrieved with the
(2 of 3) [CMA-956/2018]
judgment and award dated 11.12.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in MAC No.482/2006, whereby an amount of Rs.6,47,800/- has been awarded in favour of claimant and non-claimants and they have been held entitled to get 50%-50% of the amount of compensation respectively alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition.
Earlier vide judgment dt.9.7.2009, tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.4,44,000/- as compensation in favour of non-claimants. Against the said judgment, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.5372/09 and 2767/11 were filed. This court vide its judgment dt. 2.5.2016 set aside the judgment dt. 9.7.2009 passed by the tribunal and remanded the matter to decide the case afresh qua issues no. 3 & 4. Pursuant thereto, the Tribunal on the basis of the pleading of the parties, framed the issues and evaluated the evidence on record. After hearing counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition and awarded the amount as indicated above.
Feeling aggrieved with the impugned award, the nonclaimants have filed the instant appeal inter-alia on the various grounds.
Learned counsel for the non-claimants submits that the learned tribunal wrongly decided issue No.3 in favour of claimant Smt. Hema. Learned counsel for the non-claimants submits that tribunal has wrongly awarded 50% of the award amount to Smt. Hema, so called wife of the deceased. Learned counsel for the non-claimants submits that Hema never married with the deceased. She is not legally wedded wife of the deceased. So, she is not entitled to get any compensation. Learned counsel for the
(3 of 3) [CMA-956/2018]
non-claimants submits that Manju was legally wedded wife of the deceased Puran and she had desserted Puran. So, whole compensation amount be awarded to parents of the deceased Puran.
Learned counsel for the claimant submitted that the tribunal while deciding the issue No.3 elaborately discussed the evidence and came to the conclusion that Hema was legally wedded wife of the Puran because Gram Panchayat-Beer and Gram Panchayat Dhaal has granted a certificate to the effect that Hema married to Puran. Learned tribunal also mentioned this fact that Manju was not produced before the tribunal for recording her evidence. So, present appeal being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the non-claimants as well as learned counsel for the claimant.
While deciding the issue No.3, tribunal had elaborately discussed the evidence and came to the conclusion that as per the documentary as well as oral evidence, Hema was the legally wedded wife of Puran. So, in my considered opinion, no interference is required by this court in the findings of the tribunal. The findings arrived at by the tribunal are just and proper with which I fully concur.
Therefore, the appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed which stands dismissed accordingly.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Brijesh 25.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal erred in concluding that the respondent wife was legally wedded and entitled to compensation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Harji S/o Shri Chhoga
Smt. Prem Devi W/o Shri Harji
Smt. Hema W/o Shri Puran
Kashi Prasad S/o Shri Ram Dharm
M/s. Dynamic Motors Pvt. Ltd.
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
Narendra Singh Dhadha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
