Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
Heard.
Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the learned Single
Judge of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant.
Challenge in the said appeal was to an award made by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal No. VII, Bijapur (in short MACT). An award of Rs.2,59,400/-
was made. The main contention of the appellant before the MACT as well as
before the High Court was that the deceased did not sustain any injury in any
accident involving the bus of the
...2/-
corporation. Reference was made to the evidence of the doctor, who had
admitted the deceased to the hospital, that the deceased had suffered head injury
due to fall from the height of 8 to 10 feet of his own house. Though this was
specifically stated in the written statement, the MACT and the High court
brushed aside the same stating that there was indirect admission about the
deceased having sustained injury in vehicular accident. The effect of the
evidence of the doctor and exhibit R-1 does not appear to have been looked into
by the MACT and the High Court. MACT did not place reliance on the
document R-1 on the ground that the brother of the injured stated that he did
not know what was written in the document and his signature was taken on one
page. This conclusion overlooks from the fact that a doctor will not take a
signature on a piece of paper mentioning something which is not correct.
Exhibit R-1 establishes beyond the shadow of doubt that the injuries sustained
were not on account of any vehicular accident. That being so, the MACT and
...3/-
the High Court were not justified in making any award. The order of the MACT
and High Court stands set aside.
The appeal is accordingly, allowed.
New Delhi, May 01, 2009