Para 4. Nil.
RO & AC (= The evidence had been read aloud to the witness, and had been admitted to be correct).
Sd/- rrr, Eleventh (Ekadash) Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), ... Chattisgarh.
Type written on my instructions:-
Sd/- rrr, Eleventh (Ekadash) Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), ... Chattisgarh.
==================== ===================
Proof of BRIBE IN POLICE DEPARTMENT:- Cross case is filed against the Truck in such a way that they will escape without difficulties. In the only one FIR itself, the case can be filed against both the Drivers being there is only one incident and it was not a quarrel or fight to get cross FIR relying on other party’s statements. However, Police had filed FIR against outsider Car, and not against Same State’s Truck means, they got good amount of bribe to save the Truck Driver from prosecution, being he is alive and filed case only against dead driver of Qualis Car, without realizing the Financial implications that will have on the Owner of the Car. Thus, immediately after the accident, the affected parties should contact the Insurance Company and Police, to get a proper FIR registered is the Advocate practice instructions had been given in the forthcoming specimen of FIR in a Motor Vehicle Accident Case – Author.
-: FIRST INFORMATION REPORT :-
Under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code
(1). District: ..., Maharashtra; Police Station fff, FIR number ... of 2005, dated 22-5-05.
(2). Act and Sections: Indian Penal Code, Sections: 279, 304A, 337, 335 and 427. Other Acts and Sections: Motor Vehicle Act, Section 184.
(3). Date of incident: 22-5-05. Day: Sunday. Time: between 5.30'o clock of early morning of the date 22-5-05.
Information received at Police Station: on date 22-5-05, at 6:00'o clock AM.
General Diary Reference No..../05.Time 20:40 hrs.
(4). How the incident taken place: Accident.
(5). Place of Occurrence- Patrolling place: fff, from the place ... 6 km towards the East direction.
(6). Person who had provided the information: From the side of the Government jkl son of mno, Date of Birth- ..., Nationality: Indian, Occupation: Employment (Police Inspector), Address: Police Station fff, District: ...., Maharashtra.
(7). Details of accused with complete address: TATA Qualis bearing number ggg. Name of the Driver: Late Mr.hhh, son of Mr.ddd, aged 36 years, resident of mmm, District ..., Chattisgarh.
(8). Concise description of the incident: On date 22-5-05, the information had been received that at the National Highway No-6 between ... to ..., an accident had taken place between a Qualis Vehicle and a Truck. A few persons who had been sitting in those vehicles had died. Also some of them had been injured. The (Police) employees had been send to the place of incident to do investigation. Upon getting information, the crime serial number ... of 2005 had been registered. We, namely the Police Inspector jkl along with co-workers had traveled by the Government Jeep and went to the place of incident and reached there. At the place of incident, that is National Highway No-6, near the Gorodhi Shivar, the Truck No. jjj and TATA Qualis bearing number ggg had been standing after meeting with the accident. In the presence of following witnesses: Witness serial number (1) Mr.pqr aged 34 years, resident of fff and (2) Mr.stu aged 40 years, resident of ...; the Panchnaama of the place of incident had been prepared. At the place of incident, it is visible that, the Truck No. jjj is standing in the way/ road between place-1 and place-2, facing to the place place-2; at the left side of the road, which is moving away from own side (= route/ lane), and after crossing (= jumping) the road divider the truck had entered inside (other side's route) to the distance of 3 foot, and it had been standing there. Following (damages) had been observed on the Truck: The Truck's driver's hand/ side's front side's head light had been found broken; the driver's hand/ side's tire also had been found to be broken. At the distance of 14 foot from the Truck, the vehicle TATA Qualis bearing number ggg had been standing which had been going towards ..., Maharashtra; which had been standing in such a manner that it had met with an accident after hitting with the truck. The front side of the vehicle had been completely found to be broken and twisted (“thod-marod hua hai”). Two individuals who had been sitting in the Qualis vehicle, whose names are as follows: (1) Mr.uuu aged 17 years and (2) Mr.eee aged 24 years; both resident of EWF MP Housing Board, Nandini Road, District ..., Chattisgarh; had died in the accident. The same thing had happened to the Injured Driver Mr.hhh son of Mr.ddd aged 30 years. Following individuals who had been sitting in the Qualis had been injured: injured-1 aged 19 years; Mr.sss injured-2 aged 24 years; and injured-3 aged 23 years.
Reason for delay in Reporting the incident:- The Inspection which had been carried out for the Crime No. .../05 dated 22-5-05.
(9). Facts of the FIR:- The incident had taken place in the following manner: the vehicle TATA Qualis bearing number ggg had been driven by the deceased (driver) after making following persons to travel by the same vehicle Qualis: persons No- 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6; they were made to sit and had been taken from the place mmm to kkk; at that time the accused Driver had drove his Qualis in a high-speed and carelessness manner, and had strongly hit upon the Truck which had been coming from the opposite direction which is the Truck No. jjj. Because of this a few persons who had been sitting in the Qualis vehicle had died and some persons got injured. Accordingly the Crime had been registered against the driver of the Qualis Vehicle.
Police Station- fff.
Mr. jkl Designation: Police Insp.
====================
Third page of the FIR document:-
The following individual: injured-1 and injured-2 had got injured and those individuals and the deceased persons had been taken to the Meso Hospital; being accompanied by Head Constables to get treatments. During the treatments the Driver Mr.hhh had died. Head Constable-1 had produced the other Papers/ documents related to this matter. All the three persons dead body had been send to the Meso Hospital to get them Postmortem examined. Those dead bodies had been handed overred to the relatives of the deceased persons, for performance of cremation rites. After the investigation the following thing had came to the front side that: the accident had been caused because the Driver of the vehicle Qualis bearing number ggg, namely Deceased Mr.hhh son of Mr.ddd had drove his Qualis Vehicle in a Careless manner and in very high speed and the accident had taken place. Also had done a strong hit upon the Truck No. jjj which had been coming from the front side. Because of which the driver himself and other two persons had died. Also other persons who had been sitting in the Qualis Vehicle had got injured. Both the vehicles had got damaged. The Crime had been registered against the deceased Driver of the vehicle Qualis bearing number ggg.
Relying upon the Investigation the Crime had been registered and produced before the Court. The Report had been produced before the Judicial Magistrate, at place...
Police Station Officer.
Police Station- fff
Sd/- Name:- jkl, Circle Inspector of Police.
======================
Normally only High Court’s order can be read by purchasing the Law Books. However many cases end at the Trial Court itself. Thus a Trial Court order is given as Specimen in this MACT CASE – Author.
Eleventh Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), ...., Chattisgarh.
(Presiding Officer Mr.rrr).
Claim Case No. ... of 2006.
Date of filing- 21.06.2005
1. Shrimati aaa, aged 48 years, wife of Mr.bbb Occupation: House wife.
2. Mr.bbb aged 50 years, son of Mr.ccc, Both the persons resident of MP Housing Board Colony, mmm District- ..., Chattisgarh.
... Applicants.
Versus
1. Mr. ddd, occupation: owner of the vehicle Qualis, resident of Quarter No. mmm, Tehsil and District- ..., Chattisgarh.
2. The National Insurance Company Ltd, Branch Office mmm, through the Branch Manager, Branch Office ..., Chattisgarh.
... Non Applicants.
Judgment (“adhi nirnaya”)
(Passed on today the 02 February 2007)
1. The applicants had moved an application against the non-applicants that on date 22-05-05, the non-applicants had caused the death of the son of the applicants, by causing accident by driving the Qualis Vehicle bearing number ggg by driving this vehicle in a high-speed and careless manner. The compensation for this incident, from the non-applicants, jointly and severally had been demanded, and the application had been filed for this purpose under section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act.
2. The admitted fact is that, with the status of a previously known individual (“parichit ki hasiyat se”), the son of the applicants had been traveling on the date of incident 22-05-05 in the Vehicle Qualis Car bearing number ggg, from mmm, Chhatisgarh to kkk, Maharashtra; to attend a marriage. The said vehicle's maintaining owner (“palak swami”) is the non-applicant no-1, and the Driver had been Mr.hhh, who had died. The said vehicle had been insured by the non-applicant no2.
3. The facts are narrated in the application of the applicants is in the following manner: on date 22-05-05, their son had came to the place mmm, Chhatisgarh; to attend the marriage of a person known to him. Their Barat (= the marriage party of the boy/ groom, going to the house of the bride) had been going to the place kkk, Maharashtra. The Vehicle Qualis Car bearing number ggg belonging to his known person had came with an intention to go as part of the Barat. In the said vehicle, the son of the applicants and other relatives had sat down as part of the Barat. From the very beginning of the journey, (Late Shri) hhh had been driving the Car in a high-speed and careless manner and taking the said vehicle to it's place of destination. During morning approximately at 5.00'o clock, the vehicle had reached near the following place: located at NH-6, namely Police Station fff, Maharashtra. At that time, from the front side one Dumper Vehicle bearing number jjj had been coming, and due to loss of control, the hitting had taken place. Due to the said accident, at the place of incident itself, the driver Mr.hhh's death had taken place. Also the son of the applicants' also had died at the place of incident itself because of the grievous injuries which had been suffered by him. Also other passengers of the said vehicle also had suffered a lot of injuries. After the incident, the dead body of the son of the applicants had been subjected for Inquest Examination and to get that Postmortem examination, that had been taken to the Government Hospital, ..., Maharashtra.
4. The above incident's Reporting had been done at the Police Station fff, Maharashtra. Vide the said Report, against Late Mr.hhh, the crime serial number ... of 2005 had been registered under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code. After the complete investigation, the charge sheet had been filed at the Court which had territorial jurisdiction. The son of the applicants had been a healthy young man of 25 years age, at the time of incident. Also he had been owning a shop named ... Motor Winding Shop, in which he had been working and earning monthly Rupees 7000/-. Also since those days he had been maintaining himself and all the members of his family. He had been the only earning member of their family and after the death of the son of the applicants, they had lost the said income. Because of which they are facing the mental and financial difficulties. To get compensation for the above loss, the applicants had procured the Certified copy of the above criminal case and filed (the present/ instant) case against the father of the deceased driver, namely Late Mr.hhh, who is the non-applicant no-1. Because of the above accident the death of Late Mr.eee had taken place who is the son of the applicants. Thus against the above stated accident, for the death of their son, the applicants are demanding compensation from the non-applicants jointly and severally, a sum of Rs.25,50,000/-, and the application is filed to pray that, the above amount may be directed to be paid by the non-applicants to the applicants.
5. The non-applicant no-1 had admitted only admissible facts, and had denied all other facts. He had stated that, the Qualis Car bearing number ggg had been driven by the deceased driver Mr.hhh in the normal manner carefully. During morning 4.30'o clock, when (the said car) reached near the Police Station fff, at the ... Road, Maharashtra; at that time from the front side (another vehicle had came, that is) the Dumper Vehicle bearing number jjj which had been driven by it's driver Mr. pqr; in high-speed, negligent and careless manner; and he had caused very strong hit upon the Qualis Car, because of which the persons who had been travelling by the said qualis car, namely Mr.hhh, and other person who had been travelling, had died at the place of incident itself. Because of which, the person responsible for the accident is the Driver of the Dumper Vehicle. Because against him also the Report had been filed. Because of which the applicants could have filed Compen-sation claim against the said Dumper Vehicle. Without filing claim petition against the said individual, being the non-applicant no-1 is the father of the deceased Mr.hhh, the case had been filed against him by saying that he is the responsible person and he had been made a party, which is not legal, because the claim of Motor Accident is relying upon the law of who had committed wrong and no person's successors can be made parties in the case for the wrong which had been committed by another. Because along with the death of the person who had committed wrong, the responsibility comes to an end. Because of this reason the claim of the applicants is eligible to be dismissed against this non-applicant. The description of the loss suffered had been highly exaggereated from the real facts, by the applicants. Thus the Claim Application of the applicants may be dismissed.
6. The non-applicant no-2 had not accepted the Application of the applicants and had stated that, regarding the incident of happening of an accident, the legal responsibility to give information (to the insurance company) is with the owner of the vehicle, however he had not given any such information, thus it do not have any information about the incident. What are the informations which had been provided by the applicants about the accident is not correct. The responsibility to prove those facts are with the applicants. The non-applicant no-2 is responsible to pay compensation only when the conditions of the insurance had been complied by the driver of the vehicle. If the vehicle had been driven contrary to the conditions of the insurance, the present non-applicant is not responsible to pay compensation. Along with above grounds (another ground had been alleged is), the above vehicle had been a private vehicle, thus in the valid insurance policy, the passengers who had been travelling by the said vehicle, for their damages, the insurance company is not responsible. The passengers of the said vehicles are not considered to be third party, and regarding the ticket-free passengers who are travelling by the said vehicle, no separate insurance premiums had been paid, thus the risk of death or injury being suffered by the ticket-free passengers are not covered in the insurance policy, thus the non-applicant is not responsible to pay compensation. Thus the claim of the applicants may kindly be rejected.
7. Relying upon the stands taken by both the parties, I had framed followings Questions to argue and their decision/ substance is written against those questions.
(Note:- In the following specimen, the word “Question to argue” is written. It can also be told as “Issues” or “Points for determination”. In this specimen, after the Issues framed, the decision of the court in one word is given. However, there is a Stage at each litigation to frame issue; on that day, against each “issue” the following will be written: “OPP” OR “OPD”; in this OP = Onus placed on, and P = Plaintiff and D = Defendant. In this case, the terms used are: Applicant and Non-Applicant. Thus the terms which could have been used is “Onus placed on Applicant”, “Onus placed on Non-Applicant No-1” and “Onus placed on Non-Applicant No-2” - Author).
Sl. No.1. Questions to argue/ Issue/ Point for Determination:- Whether the incident dated 22-05-05 had taken place because the deceased person Mr.hhh as the Driver had driven the Qualis Car bearing number ggg, which had been owned by the non-applicant no-1, in high-speed and careless manner, had had hit upon other vehicle, because of which the passenger in the said Car, namely the son of the applicants Mr.eee's death had taken place ? (Onus placed on Applicant = OPP).
Decision/ substance:- Yes.
Sl. No.2. Questions to argue:- Whether the car which had been subjected for the accident, namely ggg, had been driven on the date of incident, in a manner contrary to the conditions of the Insurance ? (Onus placed on Non-Applicant No-2 = OPD-2).
Decision/ substance:- No.
Sl. No.3. Questions to argue:- Whether the applicants are having right to obtain compensation from the non-applicants, if yes, from whome and how much ?
Decision/ substance:- From the non-applicant no-1, Rupees 4,54,000 (Rupees four lakhs fifty four thousands only), with simple interest at the rate of 6%, it is the right to get.
Sl. No.4. Questions to argue:- Help and costs ?
Decision/ substance:- Additional sums granted.
// Analysis, Decision and
Reasons for the decision//
8. Decision/ substance for the Questions to argue No-1:- Shrimati aaa (the Applicant Witness No-1) had testified that, the deceased person Mr.eee had been her son. On date 22-05-2005, her son had gone to attend the marriage of his friend. By traveling in the Qualis vehicle ggg, which had been employed/ hired/ deployed as the said marriage's part, he had been going from the place mmm, Chhatisgarh to the place kkk, Maharashtra. The said vehicle had been driven by the driver in a very high speed and with carelessness, because of which at the place ...., Maharashtra; that had hit with a Dumper Vehicle jjj, because of which her son Mr.eee's death had taken place at the place of incident itself. This witness is an experianced witness. Regarding the incident, the witness Mr.sss (the Applicant Witness No-2) had testified that, on the date of incident, he had been going to attend the marriage of his brother, by travelling in the Qualis Car bearing number ggg, from the place mmm, Chhatisgarh; to the place kkk, Maharashtra. The Late Mr.hhh had been driving the said vehicle in very high speed, to take that to the destination. When they had reached near the place Police Station fff, Maharashtra; at that time, Late Mr.hhh had driven the Qualis Car in very high speed, took that to the opposite direction, had had hit upon the Dumper vehicle which had been coming from the left side. In the said accident, following persons death had taken place: the Driver Mr.hhh, Mr.uuu and Mr.eee. He (this witness) got injuries upon the following parts of his person: head, torso, mouth, lips and teeth.
9. Similar evidence had been testified by the non-applicant no-1, Mr.ddd (the Non-Applicant Witness No-1) that, the deceased person Mr.hhh had been his son. The Vehicle Qualis Car bearing number ggg, which is owned by him, had been taken by his son to the Marriage. In the said vehicle, himself and his friends had been going to attend the marriage from the place mmm, Chhatisgarh; to the place kkk, Maharashtra; the vehicle had been taken away for the purpose of attending the marriage. On the next day, that is on date 22-05-05, during morning time by 8'o clock through phone the information had been received that, the Qualis Car met with an accident near the place ......, Maharashtra. In the said accident, his son had been injured, at that time he had gone along with his son to .... After reaching there it had been known that, his son had died. Similar manner evidence had been testified by Mr.xxx, the Non-Applicant Witness No-2, who is the son of the non-applicant no-1.
10. The applicant Mrs.aaa (the Applicant Witness No-1) had testified that, the said incident's Reporting had been done at the Police Station Moudha. The true copy of the said Report had been procured by her and produced in the Case, which is the Exihibit P-1; in that document, at Point A, it is written that, from the position of the Vehicles at the place of incidence, the mistake had been committed by the Qualis Car. The inquest report prepared in the presence of independent witnesses about the place of incident is the Exihibit P-2. The report prepared for the examination of the dead body is the Exihibit P-3; their Translation to Hindi Languages are the Exihibit P-1A, the Exihibit P-2A, and the Exihibit P-3A. The eye witness to the incident, namely Mr.sss (the Applicant Witness No-2) had testified that, the incident had taken place near the Police Station fff, approximately between 4 and 5'o clock during morning time. The Advocate for the non-applicant no-1 had argued that, the above accident had taken place because of the driving done in high-speed and with negligence by the driver of the vehicle Dumper bearing number jjj. The Police had filed a False Report against the driver of the Qualis Car Mr.hhh. The non-applicant no-1 had not produced any of the eye witness of the incident and examined, to prove above argument done by him. The evidence of following persons had been testified: non-applicant Mr.ddd (the Non-Applicant Witness No-1) and Mr.xxx (the Non-Applicant Witness No-2). However those individuals are not eye-witnesses of the incident. The eye witness to the incident is Mr. sss (the Applicant Witness No-2). To him/ in front of him, the Advocate for the non-applicant had made the following question/ suggestion that: the driver of the Dumper vehicle had driven his vehicle in high-speed and with negligence and had crossed the Road-divider and had hit upon the Qualis Car, because of which the accident had taken place. The said question/ suggestion had been not accepted by the witness. Also during the cross examination, at para 4, it had been admitted that; the driver of the Qualis Car had hit upon the xxx side of the Truck, because of which the accident had taken place.
11. The Advocate for the non-applicant no-1 had addressed the argument also that, the driver of the Qualis vehicle had been taking his vehicle in normal speed and he had already traveled 200 to 250 kilometers. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that, he had driven the said vehicle