Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 288 (PNJ)

Sumitra v. Karnail Singh

2003-02-14

S.S.GREWAL

body2003
JUDGMENT S.S. Grewal, J. - This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 30.1.1996 passed by Shri P.C. Goel, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat in MACT Case No. 112 of 1993. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 13.11.1993 Satish Kumar unloaded the paddy at Karnal and on way back started driving his Majda vehicle bearing registration No. HNK-8520 to Murthal in District Sonepat. His cleaner Ramesh Kumar was also travelling with him and this vehicle was driven on the left (correct) side of the road. However, when at about 2.00 a.m. it reached nearing Ashoka Rages in the area of Samalkha Tehsil and District Panipat, the tyre of the same got punctured and after repairing the same, said Satish Kumar, driver of the same, started checking it. In the meanwhile, bus No. HR-05-B-6894 belonging to Haryana Roadways Ambala came there from the rear and Karnail Singh, driver thereof, was driving it in a rash and negligent manner. He had no control on the speed and in the violation of traffic rules, he hit the bus into the said Majda from behind. Because of that Satish Kumar suffered multiple injuries/fractures and when he was taken to Civil Hospital, Panipat, he was declared dead. 3. It is also the case of the appellants that on the date of accident itself said Ramesh Kumar lodged a report of this accident with the police and thereupon the police swung into action, arrested said Karnail Singh being the erring driver of the offending bus and after necessary investigation has challanged him for causing this accident by his rash and negligent driving. 4. Petitioners, the parents of said Satish Kumar, have asserted that their son was getting salary to the tune of Rs. 2500/- per month by working as driver on the vehicle and was the sole bread winner of the family and since he was young of the age of about 23 years, they are entitled to claim compensation to the tune of Rs. 15,00,000/-, on account of his untimely death caused in the road vehicular accident. 5. Respondent No. 1 did not file written statement. Rather on 3.2.1995 he was not present either in person or through counsel and in such circumstances ex-parte proceedings were initiated against him. However, in their joint written statement respondent Nos. 15,00,000/-, on account of his untimely death caused in the road vehicular accident. 5. Respondent No. 1 did not file written statement. Rather on 3.2.1995 he was not present either in person or through counsel and in such circumstances ex-parte proceedings were initiated against him. However, in their joint written statement respondent Nos. 2 and 3, the owners of the bus in question, contested the claim of the appellants by asserting that this bus was being driven by Karnail Singh, respondent No. 1 at a normal speed and when he reached nearing the site of accident, suddenly the FAO driver of the Majda got down from the vehicle, on the middle of the road and finding him getting down, Karnail Singh applied the breaks with full force and despite that the bus slipped and hit into the said Majda. As such Satish Kumar, the driver of the Majda was himself responsible for the accident. Otherwise also the claim of the petitioners is false as well as highly exaggerated. Moreover, this petition is bad for non-joinder of parties, namely the owner and insurer of the said Majda. 6. In the wake of various pleas, raised by the parties, the following issues were settled for decision :- 1. Whether the accident on 13.11.1993, near Ashoka Rages in the area of P.S. Samalkha, took place due to rash and negligent driving of Karnail Singh, respondent No. 1, driver of bus No. HR-01-B-6894 ? OPP. 2. If issue No. 1 is proved, whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation, if so, how much and from whom ? OPP 3. Whether the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties namely owner and insurer of vehicle No. HRK-8520 ? OPR 2 and 3. 4. Relief. 7. The tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 76,800/- along with costs and interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 6.12.1993 till payment of the same in favour of the appellants. This appeal was also referred to the Permanent Lok Adalat of this Court, which vide its order dated 22.1.2001 passed by President A.L. Bahri and Mrs. Kamlesh Gupta, Member, awarded compensation amounting to Rs. 1,87,400/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of institution of the claim petition i.e. December 6, 1993 till payment. This appeal was also referred to the Permanent Lok Adalat of this Court, which vide its order dated 22.1.2001 passed by President A.L. Bahri and Mrs. Kamlesh Gupta, Member, awarded compensation amounting to Rs. 1,87,400/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of institution of the claim petition i.e. December 6, 1993 till payment. It was also observed in the order that if the parties object to the proposed order as above, they may move High Court with objection petition within two months for the disposal of the appeal on merits according to law. 8. On 12.2.2001 objection was filed by the State of Haryana and R.L. Anand, J. made the following order:- "The objections are taken on record. The main appeal be listed for arguments within one year." I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record carefully. 9. There is no dispute that deceased was 23 years of age and died in a motor vehicle accident on 13.11.1993. At that time, he was driver and was drawing salary of Rs. 1,400/- per month. He was driving Majda vehicle bearing registration No. HNK-8520. He must have married in next five years. So, his contribution towards claimants was for five years at the rate of Rs. 950/- per month and after marriage, he would have contributed Rs. 700/- per month towards his parents and his pay must have increased during that time. So, in toto he is entitled to Rs. 950 x 12 x 5 + 700 x 12 x 11. In this case, multiplier of 16 has been applied. So, the whole claims works out to be Rs. 1,49,400/- which arounds to be Rs. 1,50,000/-. The appellants are also entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. December 6,1993 till payment. Order accordingly.