- (1.) In this appeal, the order dated 17th March, 2009 passed by the learned Judge, M.A.C.T., 2nd Court, Malda in connection with MACT Case No. 15 of 2007 has been challenged whereby the claim petition filed by the present appellants was dismissed.
(2.) Sri Saidur Rahaman for the appellants has raised before us number of points in support of the appeal.
(3.) Sri Rahaman has submitted since it has been proved that the victim was a child of tender age, concept of contributory negligence was not applicable in the present case. The Tribunal, according to Sri Rahaman, proceeded on the basis that it was not proved beyond shadow of doubt that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of the offending vehicle which was insured under the company of the respondent since the mother of the child who was accompanying her was not examined. Sri Roy was of the view that as otherwise the case has been proved this could not have been a very strong circumstance to straightaway refuse the prayer for compensation, more particularly in the case having beneficial orientation.;