SEFALI DEY Vs. AMIT DEY
LAWS(TRIP)-2021-2-25
HIGH COURT TRIPURA
Decided on February 11,2021

Sefali Dey Appellant
VERSUS
Amit Dey Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Akil Kureshi,J. - (1.) Both these appeals arise out of an award dated 25.08.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala dismissing the claim petition of these appellants.
(2.) Brief facts are as under: On 04.08.2014 one Bhajan Dey was driving an auto rickshaw when his vehicle collided with another auto rickshaw driven by one Amit Dey. Amit Dey received minor injuries whereas Bhajan Dey received more serious injuries for which he was shifted to a hospital. He, however, died on 13.08.2014. His dependents, i.e. his parents, widow and minor child filed claim petition being T.S. (MAC) No.350 of 2014 claiming compensation of Rs.14,00,000/- from driver, owner and insurer of the auto rickshaw of Amit Dey. It appears that the deceased was immediately taken to a hospital due to his serious injuries whereas Amit Dey reported to the police station about the accident. The police investigation was carried out when statements of passengers of the auto rickshaw were recorded. When the claim petition was conducted, the widow of the deceased alone entered the witness box. Since she did not have any personal knowledge about the manner in which the incident took place, the Claims Tribunal refused to believe that the deceased died on account of negligent driving of the driver of other auto rickshaw, i.e. Amit Dey. The Tribunal observed that the claimants could have examined the passengers in the auto rickshaw who would be the eyewitnesses which they had failed to do. Primarily on such grounds the claim petition was dismissed. Against this award, the mother of the deceased has filed MAC Appeal No.93 of 2017. The father is not joined since he has passed away in the meantime. The widow on her behalf and on behalf of the minor child has filed MAC Appeal No.96 of 2017. In MAC Appeal No.93 of 2017 the appellant has filed an application for bringing additional evidence on record. According to the appellant, she is in a position to produce the eyewitnesses who were travelling in the auto rickshaw of the deceased at the time of accident.
(3.) In facts of the present case, I am inclined to remand the proceedings before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for further trial and fresh disposal of the claim petition. As noted, the husband and son of the claimants met with a serious accident. He had to be rushed to a hospital where after few days he died due to the injuries. At that time, the family would not have the presence of mind to note down the names and addresses of the passengers of the auto rickshaw. In all probabilities before the family members had reached the scene of accident, the passengers would have dispersed. In a claim petition, the Court carries out an inquisitorial inquiry and whenever need be, assists and enables the claimants to bring on record proper and correct evidence and material so that a fair and a correct decision can be rendered.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.