The Gujarat High court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Umesh Trivedi while dismissing an appeal filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a Motor Accident Claim Petition observed that offending driver’s statement recorded in Motor Accident Case cannot form part of Charge-sheet. (Reliance General Insurance Company Limited vs. Ashaben Vikrambhai Chauhan)
Facts of the case
The Court was hearing an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act Challenging the Order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, wherein a Compensation worth Rs 25,28,000 with 9% Interest per annum was Awarded to the Claimants.
The Compensation was Awarded for the Death of Victim caused in an Accident when the Opponent’s truck dashed with his motorcycle. Accordingly, the Tribunal calculated INR 17,069 as the deceased's monthly income inclusive of 50% prospective earning. Consequently, INR 25,28,000 was calculated as the amount of compensation including funeral costs, etc.
Contention of the Parties
The learned Advocate for the appellant drawing the attention of the Court to a statement of driver of the offending vehicle, which is produced by a separate list of documents submitted that it is only the deceased who can be said to be negligent on a highway crossing the road in between the divider and if not solely responsible at-least contributory negligence be also considered to be attributed to the deceased himself.
In support of the aforesaid contention, which is raised even in the written arguments, he further drew the attention of the Court to the statement of the first informant, which is recorded pursuant to First Information Report, that accident occurred while crossing road from the divider. Therefore, he has submitted that at least some portion of contributory negligence is required to be attributed to the deceased which will reduce the burden of the appellant.
Courts Observation & Judgment
The Court at the very outset opined that the Appellant’s Statement Recorded in the Case could not be used against him during the Trial.
The bench noted that also, in the Absence of Examination of the driver before the Tribunal, the Evidence with respect to the driver’s Sole Negligence could not be Disputed before the Insurance Company. It further noted that the Insurance Company failed to Cross-Examine the driver of the Offending vehicle to assert its Contentions.
The bench dismissing the appeal noted, “After examining the evidence led before it, the Tribunal has correctly concluded in paragraph No.11 holding the driver of offending vehicle -Truck to be solely responsible and negligent in driving it, which caused the death of the deceased.
Neither from the statement nor from the judgment, Mr.Mehta, learned advocate for the appellant could make out a case for interference on the ground of attributing any contributory negligence to the deceased and therefore, there is no substance in this appeal as it is the sole point raised to assail the impugned judgment and award. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed.”
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
