Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 2181 (RAJ)

Urmila Devi v. Vijay Singh

2008-09-16

GUMAN SINGH

body2008
Judgment Hon'ble SINGH, J.—This appeal has been preferred by the dependents of deceased Nathulal against the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur city, Jaipur vide judgment dated 28.7.1999 whereby claim petition of the appellants was dismissed on the basis of finding on issue no.1 which was decided against the appellant-claimants. 2. The facts in brief of the case are that the accident took place on 18.10.1993 at about 8-9 p.m. in the night when the injured Nathulal was travelling in bus RSD-3691 as conductor of the bus and he died on account of injuries sustained in the accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said bus. The claim petition filed by the claimants-appellants was dismissed on the basis of finding on issue no.1 whereby the learned Tribunal held that the claimants have failed to establish that accident had taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle i.e. bus RSD-3691 causing death of Nathulal, deceased. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the evidence produced on the point and has not given weightage to the evidence of eye witness Bhanwarlal who has deposed that when he reached to the place, he saw the accident and found that deceased was lying under the vehicle and accident had occurred on account of fault of driver of bus. It is also submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in reaching to the conclusion that challan was not filed against the driver of the offending vehicle under Sec.304 IPC but the same was filed under Sec.304-A IPC along with Sec.279 IPC and substance of accusation was read over to him under Sec.304-A IPC. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the Tribunal and submitted that the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration evidence adduced during inquiry and has awarded adequate compensation and calls for no interference. 5. After hearing the rival contentions, and on going through the award,as also, the record of the case, it is revealed that it has not been a case of homicide. The learned Tribunal appears to have failed to appreciate the evidence in right perspective and the matter deserves to be remanded to the learned Tribunal for fresh decision. 6. 5. After hearing the rival contentions, and on going through the award,as also, the record of the case, it is revealed that it has not been a case of homicide. The learned Tribunal appears to have failed to appreciate the evidence in right perspective and the matter deserves to be remanded to the learned Tribunal for fresh decision. 6. Accordingly, the impugned Judgment and award dated 28.7.99 passed by the learned Tribunal is set aside and matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh decision on all the issues after hearing the parties and according opportunity of adducing the evidence, if any. The learned Tribunal is further directed to dispose of the matter as early as possible. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 23.10.2008. Record of the case be sent forthwith. 7. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.