- (1.) THE appellant claimant, Bittu, is aggrieved by award dated 8.10.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kishangarhbas (Alwar) whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed the Claim Petition filed by the appellant.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts of the case are that on 15.6.2007, around 5:30pm, the appellant was walking on the road in order to reach his field. While he was walking, a motorcycle, bearing registration No.RJ 02 SC 7527, being driven rashly and negligently, came and hit him. Consequently, the appellant suffered a fracture of his backbone, and also suffered other grievous injuries. Initially he was hospitalised at Khairthal, but subsequently he was referred to S.M.S. Hospital at Jaipur. Since the appellant had suffered injuries due to a vehicular accident, he filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal. In order to buttress his claim, the appellant examined three witnesses, including himself, and submitted a few documents. The respondent Insurance Company neither examined any witness, nor submitted any document. However, after going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal dismissed the appellant's claim petition. Hence this appeal before this Court. The learned counsel for the appellant has raised the following contentions before this Court : firstly that mere delay in filing the FIR, is not fatal to the case of the claimant, especially when the delay has been explained by the claimant. According to the appellant since he was hospitalised at Jaipur for about two months, he could not lodge the FIR. Subsequently, it is his brother who had to file a criminal complaint before the concerned Magistrate. It is only after the Magistrate had sent the complaint for further investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. that a formal FIR was lodged. Hence the delay has been explained by the appellant. Secondly, that after investigating the case, the police has already filed a charge sheet against the accused persons. Thirdly, that according to the permanent disability certificate (Exhibit 98A), the appellant had suffered 10% of disability. Lastly, that merely because the permanent disability certificate has been recorded incorrectly by the doctor, the appellant cannot be made to suffer for the same. Thus, the learned Tribunal is unjustified in dismissing the appellant's claim petition.
(3.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant, and perused the impugned award.;