Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 2496 (RAJ)

Laxmi Chhabra v. Vikash Chhabra

2011-11-17

MOHAMMAD RAFIQ

body2011
Hon'ble RAFIQ, J.—This appeal has been preferred by the appellants aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bandikui, Dausa by which, claim petition filed by the claimant-appellants has been dismissed holding that death of Devendra Chhabra by the accident has not been proved. 2. Contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the award passed by the learned Tribunal suffers from contradictions while not deciding the issues in correct perspective. While Tribunal in Issue No.2 has held that deceased was driving the Motorcycle bearing No.RJ-29M-8662 during currency of the insurance policy but in Issue No.1, it has erroneously held that the claimants failed to prove that deceased died due to accident. Learned counsel referred to the findings of the Tribunal in paras 2 and 11 where, the learned Tribunal noted that in response to the notice issued under Section 133 of the Act, owner of the vehicle in his reply has stated that his father was driving the vehicle when the accident took place. In this connection, learned counsel for the appellants referred to the post-mortem report (Ex.8) of the deceased, where it has been clearly mentioned that deceased died due to road accident and the cause of his death has been described as "coma brought about as a result of ante mortem injury to head and brain." Learned counsel also referred to the mechanical inspection report of the vehicle (Exh.12) and the site plan (Exh.16) showing that the motorcycle was found in damage condition. All these arguments have been completely ignored by the learned Tribunal. Learned Tribunal has also not appreciated the statements of eye-witness NAW2 Vikas Chhabra, who admitted that Neelgay (white footed antelope) suddenly came in front of the motorcycle, which was being driven by his father and resultantly, his father-Devendra Chhabra fell on the ground and died succumbing severe injuries sustained by him. 3. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents despite service. 4. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the appellants and perusing the award, I find that the Tribunal though computed the compensation payable to the claimants at Rs.2,38,000/- but it has ultimately dismissed the claim petition holding that claimants failed to prove that the accident took place involving motorcycle in question, which finding in my opinion, is perverse and non-est. 4. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the appellants and perusing the award, I find that the Tribunal though computed the compensation payable to the claimants at Rs.2,38,000/- but it has ultimately dismissed the claim petition holding that claimants failed to prove that the accident took place involving motorcycle in question, which finding in my opinion, is perverse and non-est. It is not in dispute that the accident took place when the deceased was driving the motorcycle and suddenly a Neelgay came in front of the motorcycle. In this connection, a reference may be made to the chemical inspection report of the motorcycle, which indicates damage of the motorcycle in that, left hand side handle of the motorcycle was crushed, headlight and front indicator were broken, safety guard was broken and milometer wire was separated from the motorcycle. Site plan also indicates that the broken piece of glasses were found at the place of incident. Apart from that, AW2 Jagmal Singh has proved this fact. In the post-mortem report also, it is mentioned that as per version given to the investigation officer, the death took place due to road accident. In such circumstances, there was no scope for the learned Tribunal to hold that accident did not take place involving the motorcycle and resultantly, the appeal deserves to be succeeded. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Award dated 8.4.2004 is set-aside. Appellants are held entitled to receive compensation as quantified by the learned Tribunal of Rs.2,38,000/-. Besides that, appellant No.1 Smt.Laxmi widow of late Shri Devendra Chhabra is held to receive compensation of Rs.20,000/- for loss of consortium and sons i.e. Prateek Chhabra and Jasbantram Chhabra appellants No.2 and 3 are held entitled to receive Rs.10,000/- each for loss of love & affection. Further, amount of Rs.5,000/- is awarded for funeral expenses. Thus, a total sum of Rs.2,83,000/- (2,38,000+45,000) is awarded to the appellants. Appellants are also held entitled to receive interest @7.5% on the aforesaid amount from the date of filing claim petition. Compliance of the judgment shall be made within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Record be transmitted back to the Tribunal forthwith.