Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 159 (HP)

Puran Chand v. Satpal

2015-03-09

RAJIV SHARMA

body2015
JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. This appeal is instituted against the award dated 2.9.2014 rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla in MAC Petition No. 0100110 of 2009. 2. "Key facts" necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that respondents-claimants No.1 to 4 (hereinafter referred to as the "claimants" for convenience sake) instituted a claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the appellant as well as respondents No.5 and 6 and predecessor-in-interest of respondents No. 7 to 9 Dalip Kumar due to death of Bishna Devi. According to the averments made in the petition, Smt. Bishna Devi was resident of Deem in Tehsil Anni, District Kullu. She was agriculturist. She was running a tailoring centre in her village and was imparting training. Her income was Rs. 20,000/- per month. She was travelling in a maxi cab bearing registration No.HP-01-0162 on 4.9.2009 from Anni to her village. When the vehicle reached at Bahu at about 4.30 P.M., it went off the road and fell into a gorge. She received injuries. She died. The accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver Puran Chand. 3. Appellant has filed reply. He has admitted the occurrence of accident. He has also admitted the death of Bishna Devi. He has also admitted that he was driving the ill-fated vehicle at the relevant time. However, according to him, accident has taken place due to sudden latent mechanical defect. Respondent No.5 also filed reply. According to him, he has sold the vehicle vide affidavit dated 11.4.2008 to the predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.7 to 9 Sh. Dalip Kumar. Respondent No.6 has averred that he has sold the vehicle to respondent No.5 on 7.1.2005. Predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.7 to 9 Sh. Dalip Kumar has not appeared despite notice. He was proceeded ex parte. 4. Issues were framed on 5.8.2011. The petition was allowed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on 2.9.2014. A sum of Rs. 7,65,000/- was awarded to the claimants. 5. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned counsel for the appellant, has vehemently argued that the accident has taken place due to certain latent mechanical defect and not on account of rash and negligent driving by his client. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have gone through the award dated 2.9.2014 carefully. 7. 5. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned counsel for the appellant, has vehemently argued that the accident has taken place due to certain latent mechanical defect and not on account of rash and negligent driving by his client. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have gone through the award dated 2.9.2014 carefully. 7. The accident has taken place on 4.9.2009. The maxi cab bearing No. HP-01-0162 was driven by the appellant. Smt. Bishna Devi had received injuries. She was 37 years old at the time of accident. PW-1 Ram Lal and PW-2 Chuni Lal were other passengers of the vehicle. They have categorically testified that the appellant has driving the offending vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. He could not control the vehicle. Thus, it went off the road. The appellant has not stepped into the witness box to establish that a sudden mechanical defect had developed in the vehicle. Thus, the plea of mechanical defect raised by the appellant has remained unsubstantiated. 8. FIR Ex. PW-1/D was lodged against the appellant by PW-1 Ram Lal. Since the vehicle had all of sudden went off the road, the principle of res ipsa loquitur would apply in this case. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has found appellant, respondent No.6 and predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.7 to 9 Dalip Kumar jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. Respondent No.6 has remained registered owner of the vehicle. However, predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.7 to 9 was in effective possession and control of the vehicle when it met with an accident. The pecuniary loss caused to the claimants has been assessed at Rs. 12,000/- per month. The age of deceased at the time of accident was 37 years and the multiplier of 13 has correctly been applied by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The claimants have also rightly been held entitled to Rs. 15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of estate. 9. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded just and fair compensation in favour of the claimants vide award dated 2.9.2014 and there is no need to interfere with the same. 10. Accordingly, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of. No costs.