Dear Makkad sir,
I hope we could do that...
But in this case, as I already mentioned above, unfortunately two-wheeler rider (victim) did not have valid DL and neither he could produce two-wheeler papers as well, so their claim application under 166 got DISMISSED. Probably these are the objections taken from insurance company/car-owner. So now the new lawyer is going to explore other options/sections to claim some compensation. So wanted to know the other provisions...
Anyway it would have been difficult to prove the negligence of car driver, when the two wheeler rider does not have proper DL and car owner/driver has all the papers incl DL. No proper witness/strict proof etc... It is good that this application got dismissed very early, else, victims would have been taken for a ride by the earlier lawyer/police... and at the end they would have left with hardly any compensation moeny.
I am amazed with the judicial speed in these cases now. I guess in the past these cases used to be dragged for years and many times victims were not getting financial aid at the right time. I think laws, procedures are getting better and tougher. If the victims don't have proper driving licence or if they are unauthorised, forget about getting HUGE compensation.