- (1.) The present appeal had been filed assailing the impugned Award dated 1.9.1998 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (for short, "the Tribunal") vide which, the claim petition of the appellant was dismissed. Precisely the averments in the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988') filed by the claimant/appellant were that on 8.3.1992 at about 2.45 P.M., he (Ranjit Singh) alongwith his wife was going from Zirakpur to his Village Sangotha on his scooter. He was on Chandigarh -Ambala road and was driving the scooter at a moderate speed and on the correct side of the road. When he reached within the revenue limit of Village Bhankharpur, a truck bearing registration No.HR-01-7185 being driven rashly, negligently and at high speed by Pavittar Singh (respondent No.3 herein), came from the side of Zirakpur and hit his scooter on the right side. As a result of the accident, he and his wife fell down. He suffered injuries on his head, right thigh and other parts of the body. From the site of accident, he was taken to Primary Health Centre, Dera Bassi, from where he was referred to General Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh, where he remained hospitalized w.e.f. 8.3.1992 to 18.5.1992 and had to undergo surgery. The accident was reported to the police at Police Station Dera Bassi. Submitting that he had spent a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- on treatment and suffered loss of income to the extent of Rs.6000/- per month for a long time and that the accident had taken place entirely due to rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver, the appellant filed the claim petition. The driver, owner and the insurer were impleaded as respondents No.1 to 3 respectively, who contested the claim petition. Respondents No.1 and 2 denied the occurrence of accident involving the offending truck. Respondent No.3 Insurance Company also denied the factum of accident as alleged by the claimant-appellant and raised all the defences available to it under the Act of 1988.
(2.) On the basis of pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:- 1. Whether injuries caused to Ranjit Singh were due to rash and negligent act of driving of respondent No.2 Bachittar Singh OPP 2. If issue No.1 is proved, to what amount of compensation the claimant is entitled to and from whom OPP 3. Whether claim petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties OPR 4. Relief.
(3.) Both the parties adduced evidence to discharge the onus of issues on each of them. Considering the ocular and documentary evidence led by the parties and the submissions made on their behalf, learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant preferred the instant appeal. The submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been heard and record perused.;