HON’BLE SRI JUSTIE V.SURI APPA RAO CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.4139 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed against the order dated 05.08.2003 passed in M.V.O.P.No.470 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati. The appellant herein filed the aforesaid O.P., seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. It was his case that while he was proceeding on a bicycle to his village from Ellareddy Kandriga Village, on 30.01.1997 at about 7.00 p.m., one jeep bearing No.MDJ 4521, being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against him, as a result of which he fell down and sustained injuries. On his complaint, a case in Crime No. 7 of 1997 was registered against the driver of the jeep. He was shifted to SVRRGG Hospital, Tirupati, where he underwent treatment for one week. He sustained grievous injuries to his middle right thigh, right foot, right heel and toe of right leg. He was working as a mason and earning Rs.100/- per day and maintaining his family members i.e. his parents, wife and three children. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he is unable to continue his mason work. He, therefore, claimed compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- against the owner of the jeep. The respondent filed written statement, resisting the claim of the appellant. The learned Judge, having considered the evidence on record, dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant, on the grounds that the appellant received only simple injuries and that he failed to prove that the respondent was the owner of the vehicle at the time of the accident. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal is filed. It is to be noted that, in order to claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant has to prove that the vehicle involved in the accident belongs to the respondent. Admittedly, the appellant did not file any documentary evidence to prove the vehicle alleged to have been involved in the accident belongs to the respondent. None of the documents filed by him disclose that the respondent was the owner of the vehicle in question at the time of the accident. In the circumstances, the learned Judge has rightly dismissed the petition filed by the appellant and I see no reason to interfere with the order under appeal. The civil miscellaneous appeal is therefore dismissed. No costs. ____________________ V.SURI APPA RAO ,J 20th December, 2010 PNV