1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 10.03.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Ahmedabad City in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 290 of 1988 wherein the claim petition preferred by the claimant came to be dismissed.
2.0 The injured claimant sustained vehicular injuries on account of negligent driving on the part of opponent No.1 who himself is owner of the said vehicle. While passing on Parimal crossing road, the opponent came driving his Scooter No. GAV 9103 and dashed with scooter No. GUI 5853 of the claimant on 12.11.1987 whereby the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. He took treatment and thereafter filed the aforesaid claim petition wherein the claim petition came to be dismissed. Hence this appeal.
3.0 Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that accident took place on 12.11.1987 and the appellant sustained injuries and was busy with medical treatment. At that time the opponent No. 1 assured to pay medical expenses and it was decided not to file police complaint. However, thereafter, the opponent No.1 refused to pay medical expenses and hence appellant had given notice through advocate on 16.01.1988 which was received by opponent No.1 and in reply thereto opponent No. 1 on 25.01.1988 has stated that accident took place due to fault of appellant and hence refused to pay amount and further informed about insurance policy details to appellant.
3.1 Both these documents were produced on record vide Exh. 28 which is exhibited as Exh. 48 and mark 28/16 which is exhibited at Exh.
49. He further submitted that in reply to notice by opponent No.1 he admitted the fact of accident; that learned Tribunal erred in not appreciating this actual incident and nonpayment of amount as assured by opponent No.1 and erred in doubting the accident and accidental injuries itself.
4.0 As a result of hearing and perusal of the documents on record it is found that the accident took place on 12.11.1987 and the appellant sustained injuries and was busy with medical treatment. At that time the opponent No. 1 assured to pay medical expenses and it was decided not to file police complaint. However, thereafter, the opponent No.1 refused to pay medical expenses and hence appellant had given notice through advocate on 16.01.1988 which was received by opponent No.1 and in reply thereto opponent No. 1 on 25.01.1988 has stated that accident took place due to fault of appellant and hence refused to pay amount and further informed about insurance policy details to appellant.
5.0 Looking to the reply to the notice the factum of accident is proved.
Therefore, no fault liability quantified at Rs. 12000/ from the opponent no. 1 who is the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident.
6.0 As far as appeal against insurance company is concerned the same is dismissed. The appeal is allowed against the owner of the vehicle. The opponent No. 1 is liable to pay Rs. 12000/ to the claimant at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition. Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*