HI6H COURT OP CHHATnSGARH. BILASPUR DB: HON'BLB I.M. QUDDUSI 68 PK&SHAST KOMAR MISHRA, JJ, M. A(CI No. 1083 OF 2010 Vs. MI8C. APPEIAL8 U/S 173 OFTHE MOTORVEHieLBS ACT. 1988 <>- APPEARANCE: Mr. Praveen Kuiaar Dhiirandhar, counsel &r the;appellant 1 Mr. Dashrafh Gupta & Mr. Sanjay Gupta, counsel for re'spondent No.3. ORDERtOR&Ll (10.12.2010) Per I.M. OiroDUSI.J. 1. This appeal Uas been filed by fhe claimaats against the awaid dated07.07.2010 passed by XI Addt Motor Accident Claims Tnbunal (F.T.C), Duig (C.G) m Claim Casc No.56/2008 dismissing the clflimoffhe iajured-clannant. ItttBBnBiBII APPBLLAMT Love Kumar Dewangmi, son of Dev Singh Dewaagan, • a^ed about 20 years, resident of vfflage Parikhurd, Post Bharregaon, Police Station Lalbag, Tahsil and District Rajnandgaon, C.G. RBSPONDENT8 1 Sohaalal Deshiaukh, son ofNaadlal Deshmukh, aged (not aientioned), resjdent of vfflage Changori, Tahsil and Distnct Durg (C.G). ......Etrlver. 2. Abdul Stiaiuein, son ofAbdul Raluni, ^ed (not laentioned), resideat of viSage Ruaanbandlia Bhilai, Tahsil and Distnct Dvrg (C.G). Owne* 3. Regional Maiiager, Uxiited India Insiirauce Compaay Ltd., Kachahari Chowk, District Raipur (C.G). .—....Jnsui®t ^•^^k:: ^. y^.. ^ !&ssf3®gfc '•SSiS2i"ai® 2. Brief facts of the case as per thc version of the claunant are that on 07.2.2008 the appeUant was goit^ to Anjora ou Motorcycle cartying with parts of petrol puinp. At fhat tiine, one Tempo bearing Regu. No. C.G.07-ZA/0791 which was being driven by respondeat no. 1 ia a rash asd negl^ent nianner dashed the luotorcycle of the appeUant, as a result of which, he sustamed grievous injuries. His knee joint, thigh bone & left foot bone were fiactured. He was admitted ia Dui^ Hospital and looking to the gravity of iEgiiries, he was admitted ia Sector-9 hospital where he had undertafcen treatment from. 07.02.2008 to 10.02.2008. Thereafter he was admitted iu Suraj Nursing Hoine, Supela Bhilai, where his leg was operated. At the tiiae of accident, thc appeUant was aged about twenty years and fae was eaming Rs.5000/- per nionth by doing repairJTig works of Retrol Puinp. On account of fhe accidcnt, fhe appellant has suffered mental and physical pain as also financial loss. Thcrefore, be filed the claua petition for the award to the tune of Rs.15,30,000/- as coinpensation on various hcads. 3. The leamed Claims Tribunal has fi'am.ed ''fhe issue as to » ^ whether the respoudent no.l was driving fhe velucle iu question in a rash and negligent manner aad caused the accident as a result of which the claimant has sustaiaed grievous injuries/penuanent disabUity. The Tribunal has aqswered the said issue in negative. 4. We Iiave heard the leamed counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. 5. ta fhe written stateinent filed by fhedriverand owner/non- applicaats 1 •& 2, a plea was taken fhat their veliicle bearing ^w^; /y%' ftaste^ s %^. '*^,.^to <z.~ 6. Rega.No. C.G. 07-ZA/0791 was not at aU iavolved ia fhe aceident No such plea was taken in thc written stateinent that there was negljgence on the part of the clatmant, but the Triburial has held that, in fact, fhe accident had taken place wifh the said vefaicJe but due to iiegli^eace of fhe claimant. It is to be notteed that iffhe drfa^er was driving fhe ofifendiag vehicle, after seeing the clauaant he should have stopped the vehick or should havc applied the brakes, but a perusal of fhe evidence sbows that fhe accident liad taken place wifh the rear wheel of the Teiapo. The r-1aimaTit has tried to proceed forward by the side ofTeinpo, the driver of fhe Teinpo did not gwe way to him aud contmued to drive the Tenipo rastify, therefore, fhe rear wheel of the Teinpo struck agauist fhe inotorcycle aad fhe clauaant feU down. The speed of the vehicle can be assessed by the gravity of iajuries sustained by fhe iajured. The dam^e of fhe niotorcycle of the clamiant and the teiapo were also reqzured to be noticed to assess fhe neglwieace but the same has also not been done. In view of fhe above and in absence of auy plea in th.e writteu statement reganimg negUgence on fhe :f » part of claimaat and also about fhe deiiial in the written statenlent that fhe vehicle was being driven rashfy aad itegl^enfly, we feel fhat the matter requires consideration at fhe end of fheTribuiial. Therefore, we allow fhis appcal iu part, set aside the impugaed award, aad remit fhe matter back to fhe Tribiuial for fissh decision. We inay naake it clcar that the decision shaU be inade a&esh wifhout beiag uifluenced by fhe findings inade ia the award which has been set aside by us and also the observations m Court ja fte fpregoing paragraphs of fhm order, The parties shaU be attowcd to ameiul tfae pleadn^s, iiuplead fhc^^p flirther evulence, if any, file thje docunaeats or gct the doeuinents verified ete., aiid SiereaflEF .fhc Tnbiuial slMll decide fhe inatter afi-esh <>n fhat I>asis, Tfae Tecords of tte Tiribunal sbaU be seilt bac^ &r^^ appear befbre thc MACToa09ttofFeb. 201.0. Thedecisioa sfaalTbejaadeasearty^^^pQSsible.NoIorderastoGosts. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge s'.'-*^'^ ,y. :i: I: •'Ss'; -^-^g-KSSS