Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Smt Poonam And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|22 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 34
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 865 of 2018 Appellant :- United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Smt. Poonam And 5 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Saurabh Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Pradyumn Kumar, Anil Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
1. Heard Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for appellant and perused the record.
2. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1988”) has arisen from judgment and award dated 18.11.2017 passed by Sri Suresh Chand-I, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/ Additional District Judge/FTC-II, Amroha in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 80 of 2016 awarding compensation of Rs. 58,95,340/-.
3. The only ground on which aforesaid award has been assailed before us is that there was a head-on-collision which demonstrate that it was a case of contributory negligence, but Court below has recorded a finding otherwise holding that Motorcycle driven by deceased was not at fault and, therefore finding recorded by Court below in respect to Issue-1 is erroneous. Reliance is placed on site-plan map prepared by Investigating Officer, but learned counsel for appellant could not dispute that aforesaid document was not proved by anyone and not prepared by any-eye witness or on the information given by any eye-witness. Therefore, the aforesaid document was apparently inadmissible in evidence.
4. Moreover, PW-2, Mohd. Kasim, whose statement was relied by Court below, was an eye-witness and he has categorically stated the circumstances in which accident took place. Nothing could be shown to demonstrate that statement of PW-2 was incredible or untrustworthy and Court below has misread or misappreciated the said evidence. In view of statement of an independent eye-witness, who has been relied by Court below, it cannot be said that finding recorded by Court below on Issue-1 is erroneous.
5. No other point has been argued.
6. We find no merits in the appeal. Dismissed at the stage of hearing under Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C.
7. The amount already deposited at the time of filing this appeal shall be remitted forthwith to Court below.
Order Date :- 22.2.2018 PS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Smt Poonam And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
22 February, 2018
Judges
  • Sudhir Agarwal
Advocates
  • Saurabh Srivastava