Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 948 (PNJ)

Atul Jain v. Nohar Chand

2002-09-19

HARJIT SINGH BEDI

body2002
Judgment H.S.Bedi, J. 1. On 20.2.1992, one Rajinder Kumar was killed in an accident, involving a four-wheeler being driven by Shish Pal, respondent No. 8 and two tractors driven by respondents Balak Ram and Sher Singh. The parents of the deceased filed a claim petition, seeking compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of the death of their son. 2. Notice was issued to the respondents and on the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed : "1. Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 8, is so to what effect? OPP 2. Whether Rajinder Kumar died due to injuries received in the accident, if so to what effect? OPP 3. Whether the petitioners are legal heirs/dependents of deceased? OPP 4. Whether the claimants are entitled to compensation, if so to what amount and from whom? OPP 5. Whether the Tribunal/MACT has got no jurisdiction to try this petition in view of the preliminary objection No. 2 of respondents No. 1 and 1-A? OPR 6. Whether Sube Singh did not hold valid driving licence on the date of accident as alleged by respondents No. 2 and 5 in P.O. No. 1 ? OPR 7. Whether the tractor of Sher Singh, allegedly involved in the accident bearing chasis No. BSN 1284153600 engine No. NXC 129356 is the same which was involved in the accident? OPR. 8. Whether the liability of the respondents No. 2 & 5 is limited as laid down in Section 147 of the Motor Vehicle Act? OPR 9. Whether the deceased was not authorised to travel with the goods in the four-wheeler No. HNQ-1150 as alleged by respondent No. 2 and 5, if so to what effect? OPR. 10. Whether the driver and owner of Ford Tractor and owner of tractor No. HNQ 5341 are colluding with the claimants as alleged by respondents No. 2 and 5, if so to what effect? OPR. 11. Relief. 3. The Tribunal in its award dated 15.2.1993 held that the accident had taken place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the four-wheeler by its driver Shish Pal. Under issue No. 2, it was held that Rajinder Kumar had died on account of the injuries suffered by him in the accident. OPR. 11. Relief. 3. The Tribunal in its award dated 15.2.1993 held that the accident had taken place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the four-wheeler by its driver Shish Pal. Under issue No. 2, it was held that Rajinder Kumar had died on account of the injuries suffered by him in the accident. Issue No. 3 was decided in favour of the claimants and it was held that they were entitled to the compensation on account of their relationship with the deceased. Under issue No. 4, it was held that the claimants were entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,09,004/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum, to be recovered from respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 jointly and severally, being owners and driver of the offending vehicle. The other issues, which are not material for the decision of this appeal, were also decided by the Tribunal. 4. Two appeals have been filed against the award of the Tribunal, F.A.O, No. 954 of 1993 by Atual Jain and Prem Chand Jain, owners of the four-wheeler and F.A.O. No. 824 of 1993 by Nohar Chand and Smt. Bhulla, the parents of the deceased. Both these matters are being disposed of by this judgment. 5. I have gone through the evidence and the reasons given by the Tribunal while making its award. 6. There is no doubt that the accident took place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the four-wheeler by Shish Pal respondent. I am also of the view that the liability has been rightly fastened on respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 before the Tribunal being the owners and the driver of the offending vehicle. Moreover, as the compensation has been determined on the basis of the documentary evidence produced by the claimants, it would be difficult to enhance the compensation. I am, however, of the opinion that in the light of the fact that the deceased was un-married and there is no evidence to show that he would marry, the personal maintenance of the deceased should be reduced from 1/3rd to 1/4th. If that be so, the amount payable to the claimants would be Rs. 1,22,000/-. The claimants would also have interest in the manner determined by the tribunal. 7. Mr. If that be so, the amount payable to the claimants would be Rs. 1,22,000/-. The claimants would also have interest in the manner determined by the tribunal. 7. Mr. Ganeriwala, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants in FAO No. 954 of 1993 has urged that it would be clear from Exh.A2 filed with Civil Misc. No. 15801- CII of 1998 that the driver was in fact holding a valid licence and as such the liability rested on the Insurance company to make the payment. I find, however, that no such plea was raised by the owner or the driver of the four-wheeler in their written statements with the result that no such issue was ever raised. Merely because some findings have been recorded in collateral proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act with regard to the death of one Karma, whose death had been indemnified by the Insurance company, would not mean that the said evidence could be read in this case as well. F.A.O. No. 954 of 1993 is accordingly dismissed while F.A.O. No. 824 of 1993 is allowed in the above terms.