State Of Tripuraandanother v. Animesh Saha
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFTRIPURA AGARTALA CRPNo.26of2010 1.TheStateofTripura,
!" # $ % & 2. TheOfficer"in"Charge, '
(
' " !" ......Petitioners -Versus- ShriAnimeshSaha, ) * *
(
' " !" ......Respondent BEFORE THEHON'BLEMR.JUSTICES.TALAPATRA + ,-
+ ,. ,16.01.2015 /"(
, Yes No √ JUDGMENT&ORDER(ORAL)
" . [2] " 001 " 2 /" $ 0434!
#- &. 550446 -
! " !" . 0 $ " 0 315 - %
7
[3] -
" " $ " $ # +28 &$ ! " " " ""8 344449:#8" "&
$$ ;<=" 00
! " /" $ +28 $
"
" 2 /"$33 0434 , "Issues were framed on 02.0.07 and since then the claimant was allowed several opportunity to adduceevidencebutnoresult. The prayer filed today seeking further time is thus disallowed as other side complaints of long harassment. So, the evidence for the claimant is closed. Defence side examined one OPW. Shri Shirendra Ch.Dasontheexaminationinchieffiledearlier." [4] " , The certificate copy of the FIR shows that the truck was responsible for the accident which
collided the bike by violating the traffic signal. The FIR was lodged immediately after the accidentmeaningtherebythattheinformantgot a little chance to exaggerate the facts. Although theothersideinthetrialtookadefencethatitis because of the negligence of the motor bike the accident occurred. But besides the oral evidence ofsaidDhirendraCh.Das,thereappearstobeno othersupportingevidencetocorroboratethesaid fact. This Court, therefore, find it convenient to holdthatAnimaSahasustainedinjuryoutofuse of motor vehicle and is entitled to the compensationundertheMotorVehiclesAct. [5] "">" $ " " $ " /" $ " !
+28"
" " . " $ $ ! " "
" /" $ 33 0434 $
2 " $ JUDGE