MOHAMMED SALAR Vs. SYED IBRAHIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) QUESTIONING the correctness of the judgment and award dated 18. 1. 2000 passed by the Motor accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) in m. V. C. No. 1649 of 1995, fixing the liability on him to pay the compensation awarded, the owner of the lorry bearing registration No. MYJ 6666 has preferred m. F. A. . No. 2563 of 2000. On the other hand, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal, the claimants, who are the parents of the deceased Mujju, have preferred Cross-Objection Petition No. 25 of 2002 for enhancement of compensation.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to this appeal as well as the cross-objections are as under: that on 20. 11. 1994 at about 6 p. m. on honnali-Shimoga Road, at Chilur village, on account of rash and negligent driving of the mini lorry bearing No. MYJ 6666 by its driver, belonging to the appellant herein, the son of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 who was aged about 7 years, studying in second standard sustained grievous injuries and consequently died on the same day at 9. 30 p. m. while undergoing treatment at hospital. Respondent Nos. I and 2 herein being the parents of the said boy filed the claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs. 4,22,000. To substantiate their claim, the claimant No. 1 examined himself as PW 1 apart from an independent eyewitness to the accident as pw 2 and got marked Exhs. P-1 to P-5. On the other hand, the driver of the offending vehicle got examined himself as RW 1 and got marked Exhs. R-1 to R-3. The insurer has not let in any evidence on its behalf. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, the Tribunal has held that the accident had occurred solely due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry and the said finding is not assailed by the appellant in this appeal. The Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs. 51,500 with interest at 12 per cent per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. Though the offending vehicle was insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. , Shimoga, the respondent No. 4 herein, the Tribunal has fixed liability to pay the compensation on the owner of the lorry, i. e. , the appellant in M. F. A. . No. 2563 of 2000 on the ground that the driver of the lorry did not have valid licence to drive the said lorry on the date of accident and consequently, has concluded that the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. Assailing the said findings of the Tribunal, the owner of the offending vehicle and the claimants are before this court.

(3.) I have heard Mr. S. V. Prakash, the learned counsel appearing for the owner of the vehicle appellant, Mr. G. Lakshmeesh rao, Advocate for claimants-respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. M. Sowri Raju, the learned counsel appearing for the insurer, respondent No. 4. The respondent No. 3, the driver of the offending vehicle, though served with the notice remained unrepresented. Perused the material available on record.