KENCHAPPA Vs. JAYALAKSHMAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal and the accompanying cross-objections arise out of the judgment and award of Motor accidents Claims Tribunal, Kolar whereby m. V. C. No. 303 of 1990 has been allowed in part and a sum of Rs. 1,49,500 with interest at 9 per cent per annum awarded as compensation for the death of late narayanaswamy in a road accident. While the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle have assailed the correctness of the award, the cross-objections filed by the legal heirs of the deceased seek a suitable enhancement of the amount awarded by the Tribunal.

(2.) THE deceased Narayanaswamy was riding a tractor-trailer driven by the appellant No. 2 which met with an accident on 18. 10. 1989 near Sugatur village in Sidlaghatta taluk of Kolar District. The injuries sustained by the deceased in the accident were fatal culminating in the filing of a claim petition which was registered as m. V. C. No. 303 of 1990 by the Tribunal at Kolar. The case of the claimants in the said claim petition was that the deceased had on the fateful day engaged the tractortrailer belonging to the appellant No. 1 to transport manure to his garden land. After unloading the manure in the garden when the tractor was returning, it met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving by its driver, the appellant No. 2 in the appeal, causing severe head injuries to the deceased who succumbed to the same two days later. A sum of Rs. 4,00,000 was accordingly claimed towards compensation with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.

(3.) THE respondents opposed the claim on several grounds giving rise to eight issues which the Tribunal has in terms of the impugned judgment answered holding that the claimants are entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 1,49,500 with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum as noticed earlier. The Tribunal held that the claimants had failed to prove that the deceased had engaged the tractor-trailer in question for the transport of manure as alleged by them. It also held that the deceased had died on account of the rash and negligent driving of the tractor by appellant No. 2 who happens to be the driver and the son of the owner appellant No. 1. The Tribunal further held that since the hiring of the tractor had not been established, there was no violation of the conditions of the permit issued in favour of the owner under the motor Vehicles Act. All the same the vehicle involved in the accident being a goods vehicle, any accident resulting in the death of a passenger being carried in such a vehicle did not give rise to any liability qua the insurance company with whom the same was insured. The insurance company was accordingly absolved by the Tribunal while awarding compensation against the driver and the owner of the vehicle jointly and severally. The Tribunal also held that the driver of the vehicle was duly licensed to drive the vehicle in question. Aggrieved by the said findings, the owner and the driver of the vehicle as also the claimants have come up in appeal as already indicated earlier.