Decided on June 09,2006

RAMESH KUMAR Respondents


- (1.) THIS appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed against award dated 30th of September, 2004, in File No.37/Claim of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kishtwar, awarding an amount of Rs.1,20,000/ - (Rupees one lac and twenty thousand) along with interest @ 6% from the date of application, to respondent, Ramesh Kumar, for the injuries suffered by him in motor vehicle accident, which took place on 6 -10 -2001 when a goods carriage, bearing registration No.JK -02H -3585, had been driven rashly and negligently by its driver near Gulab Garh -Paddar.
(2.) FACTS giving rise to this appeal are that the claimamt, Ramesh Kumar, had been travelling along with others in a goods carriage bearing registration No.JK -02H -3585 when the vehicle met with an accident because of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by its driver. Ramesh Kumar received several injuries and his student career, thus, suffered irreparable loss because of the tortious act of the driver and owner of the vehicle. Ramesh Kumar had been studying in 7th class when he met with the accident. He was initially referred to Sub -District Hospital, Kishtwar, where he remained admitted as an in -door patient from 6 -10 -2001 to 9 -11 -2001.
(3.) THE Insurance Company objected to the claim preferred by Ramesh Kumar saying that as per the medical report, the injuries suffered by the claimant were simple in nature and, as such, he was not entitled to the compensation, which he had claimed in his claim petition. Out of the pleadings of the parties, following issues came to be framed.: "1. Whether the petitioner (Ramesh Kumar) has received the injuries in an accident occurred on 6.11.01 involving vehicle No.3585 -JK02H at near Gulab Garh Paddar, which has been caused due to rash and negligent driving of the said vehicle by its driver? OPP 2. In case issue No.1 is proved in affirmative to what amount of compensation the petitioner is entitled to and from whom? OPP 3. Whether the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident if so, what is its effect? OPR -1 4. Whether the petitioner was travelling in the said vehicle as a gratuitous passenger, if so what is its effect? OPR -1 5. Whether the owner and driver have violated the terms and conditions of Insurance Policy if so how and what is its effect? OPR -1. ;

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