1. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Mayank, learned counsel for the respondent-claimants.
2. This appeal has been filed by Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Corporation being aggrieved of award dated 14.10.2020 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.3, Mathura in M.A.C.P. No.143 of 2018 on the ground that in the evidence, it has come on record that Banti had noted number of offending bus, but Bunti has not been examined before the Court of law. It is further submitted that driver of the offending bus was examined as D.W.-1 and he has denied happening of any such incident, but this aspect too has not been taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal. It is further submitted that incident is said to have taken place in front of Goverdhan Dhaba, whereas, as per the spot map, it is the on the other side of the Goverdhan Dhaba and, therefore, in the light of the spot map, place of the incident becomes doubtful and on this ground also, the U.P.S.R.T.C. deserves to be exonerated.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and going through the record, it is apparent that spot map has not been proved by U.P.S.R.T.C. by examining any competent witness to prove the same. In a matter to be adjudicated under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, cases are decided on the touchstone of probability and parameters of proving a case beyond reasonable doubt, as is applicable in the matter of criminal cases s not applicable for the matters under Motor Vehicles Act.
4. Author of the FIR has been examined by the claimants as P.W.-2. He is not only author of the FIR but also an eye-witness, inasmuch as, his evidence is unrebuttted that he was walking just behind his father, who died in the accident on the date of the incident.
5. D.W.-1, in his cross-examination has admitted that, he had started the bus at 8:00 p.m. on 12.02.2018 from Idgah Bus Stand to take it to Delhi. It is not disputed that the spot on which accident is alleged to have taken place at about 9:00 p.m. is not on the route which falls between Idgah Bus Stand and Delhi Depo. It is also not in dispute that driver or U.P.S.R.T.C. had never disputed the lodging of the FIR before the competent authorities of the police. They never complained about the lodging of the false FIR. It has also come on record that the driver obtained bail in the matter, he is facing a criminal case trial and further admitted that, no revision or appeal has been filed against lodging of the FIR. This witness also admits that, he had not received any summons from the court and has come to court to give evidence at the instance of the department. This testimony of D.W.-2 as has been discussed by the learned Tribunal leaves no iota of doubt that bus has been correctly held to be involved in the alleged accident as was driven by D.W.-1 bearing Registration No.85-Z-9196 and was involved in the accident and, therefore, plea of false implication is not made out.
6. Appeal fails and is dismissed.
7. Appellant to bear cost of this litigation which is quantified at Rs.10,000/-.
Order Date :- 22.1.2021 Ashutosh