IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.501 of 2001 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Ltd.…… Appellant. Versus SHEO Jatan MAHTO & ORS……… Respondents. ----------- For the appellant: Sri Jageshwar Prasad Sinha, Advocate. For the respondents: Sri Keshav Srivastava,Sr. Advocate. ORDER 15 2.7.2010 The National Insurance Company Ltd. has filed this appeal against the order dated 27.7.2001 passed by Sri Baikunth Nath Sahi, the learned 3rd Additional District Judge-cum- Motor Vehicle Claim Tribunal, Begusarai, in M.V. Case No.62 of 1999/70 of 2000 awarding a sum of Rs.92,000/- as compensation and directing the appellant to pay the same with interest at the rate of 9 ½ %. 2. The claimants respondents filed the aforesaid claim case alleging that the victim lady got down from Bus No.BR 09 / 5252 but in the meantime the bus driver drove the bus crushing the lady as a result of which she died. The F.I.R. was lodged. Charge sheet was submitted against the driver. The husband and the children have filed the claim application. 4. The owner and the driver appeared but left pairvi. In other words they did not contest. 5. The Insurance Company appellant filed written statement contending inter alia that the deceased did not die due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle in question. It is also alleged that driver had no valid licence. It was also 2 alleged that as per F.I.R. the number of the vehicle involved in accident was BR I / 5252 and not BR 09 / 5252. After trial by the impugned Judgment and Award the learned Tribunal, as stated above, directed the appellant to pay the compensation of Rs.92,000/-. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant raised only one point before this Court and submitted that although in the claim application it was claimed that Bus No. BR 09 / 5252 is involved but there is no evidence in support of the said fact. The learned counsel further submitted that in the fard beyan in the evidence of A.W.3 and also in the charge sheet the vehicle number has been mentioned as BR I / 5252. Therefore, the learned court below could not have awarded the compensation to the claimants because the claimants have failed to established the case of involvement of BR 09/5252. On the contrary the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the Insurance Company appellant has not at all disputed the vehicle number involved in the accident and, therefore, in appellate court he cannot be allowed to raise this disputed question of fact without there being any evidence. 7. From perusal of the claim application it appears that the number of vehicle has been mentioned as Bus bearing No.BR09/5252. In the first written statement there was no challenge regarding the said number of bus. Subsequently additional written statement was filed alleging that as per the 3 F.I.R. vehicle no.BR I / 5252 was involved in the accident. The Insurance Company only filed the written statement but in support of the statement made in the written statement no evidence was adduced. From the pleadings there is no specific denial made by the appellant that the vehicle number was BR I/ 5252 and not BR 09/5252. Only it is stated that as per the F.I.R. the vehicle number is BR I/5252. Therefore, impliedly the fact is that the alleged claim in the claim application regarding number of bus was admitted by the Insurance Company. 8. So far the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is concerned that the F.I.R. the charge sheet and A.W.3 mentioned the number of vehicle as B R I/5252, now let us examine the said documents. So far the fardbeyan is concerned it is by the informant. The statement of the informant was recorded by the police officer. On the basis of this fardbyan chargesheet was prepared after evidence. It may be mentioned here that the fard beyond or the charge sheet are filed in claim case only to prove the allegation regarding there was accident and there was injury or death as the case may be. So far the other facts are concerned the statements made in the F.I.R. / fard –beyan or the charge sheet are not admissible in proof of the facts alleged. In the present case, therefore, the number of the bus mentioned in the F.I.R. and charge sheet cannot be accepted to be the correct number. The person who recorded the F.I.R. is required to be examined. In other words there is no evidence to 4 prove the facts alleged in the F.I.R. or charge sheet regarding the number of the bus involved in accident. 9. So far the evidence of A.W.3 is concerned he has mentioned that the Bus number was BR 9/ 5252. Therefore, I find no force in the submission of the learned counsel that it is BR I/5252. Moreover, there is neither any case nor any evidence adduced by the appellant to the effect that the number of the bus involved is BR I/5252. It appears that some mistake has occurred while writing the number of the bus in these very documents relied upon by the Insurance Company. Now, therefore, in my, the appellant is trying to take advantage of these mistakes. 10. From perusal of the impugned Judgment it appears that the learned court below has also considered these aspects of the matter and has come to the conclusion that Bus No.BR 09/5252 was involved in the accident. 11. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case I find no force in the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. No other point was raised by the appellant. 12. In view of the above finding, in my opinion, there is no merit in this Misc. appeal and, accordingly, this Misc.Appeal is dismissed. 5 13. The statutory amount, if deposited, may be transmitted to the court below so that the same may be paid to the claimants. Anilkr.sinha (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)