Muslim & Ors. vs Deepak Gutpa
2009 Latest Caselaw 4856 Del

12
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                       +       MAC.APP.No.484/2008

%                                 Date of decision: 26th November, 2009


      MUSLIM & ORS.                      ..... Appellants
                           Through : Mr. Asit Kumar Roy, Adv.

                      versus

      DEEPAK GUTPA                       ..... Respondent
                           Through : Mr. Rahul Sharma, Adv.


CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.      Whether Reporters of Local papers may                NO
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?               NO

3.      Whether the judgment should be                       NO
        reported in the Digest?

                               JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The appellants have challenged the award of the learned

Tribunal whereby their claim petition was dismissed.

2. The accident dated 9th September, 1996 resulted in the

death of Ram Gyano. The deceased was survived by her

husband and four children who filed the claim petition before the

learned Tribunal.

3. According to the complaint filed by the appellants, the

accident was caused by car bearing No.DL-5CA-6122 by the

respondents. The respondents denied the accident. The

appellants examined the eye-witness Shabir Khan as PW-2 who

deposed that the accident was caused by car bearing No.DL-5CA-

6122. However, in the cross-examination, PW-2 admitted that he

is not the eye-witness of the accident and the car number was

noted down by his customer whose name he does not know.

4. The learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition on

various grounds which are not being gone into in view of the fact

that there is no cogent evidence of the accident in question

having been caused by the car bearing No.DL-5CA-6122. Even if

other things are proved, as best it is be a case of hit and run

accident and not under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

5. There is no merit in the appeal which is dismissed.

J.R. MIDHA, J

NOVEMBER 26, 2009 aj