PANNALAL BANTIA Vs. S SARASWATHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 9-10-1971 at about 2 A.M. the lorry bearing Registration No. MYR 4045, belonging to the appellant and driven by one Anwar Khan, met with an accident in between Hagaribommanahalli and Heggadahalli. One Satyanarayana. who was working as a clerk in the shop of Hallur Halappa under the name and style 'Hallur Halappa &. Co' at Davangere, was travelling in the lorry along with the goods belonging to Hallur Halappa & Co. As a result of the accident, Satyanarayana sustained injuries and died at the spot. His wife and children filed an application under S.110A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.45,000. The appellant, who was the owner of the truck, contended that the accident was due to reasons beyond the control of the driver. According to him, there was no negligence or rashness on the part of the driver. Lastly he contended that the quantum of compensation claimed was excessive. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bellary, came to the conclusion that the accident was due to the negligence of the driver. Having held thus, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.11,160 to the claimants, who are respondents 1 to 6 in this appeal.

(2.) The claimants have filed cross-objections claiming more compensation.

(3.) In this appeal Mr.Muralidhar Rao, the learned Counsel for the appellant, contended that there is no satisfactory evidence in this case to show that Satyanarayana was accompanying the goods of Halter Halappa in the lorry in pursuance of a contract of employment. Therefore, according to him, the appellant was not liable to pay any compensation, even assuing that the accident was due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry. There is no substance in this contention. Hallur Hallappa, under whom Satyanarayana was working, has been examined as PW.3. He has slated that Satyanarayana was working under him and he had agreed to pay him Rs.200 to 250 per month and he had also paid an advance of Rs.1,100 to 1,200. He has stated that he hired the lorry belonging to the appellant for transporting 90 bags of jowar to Gulbarga and in that lorry Satyanarayana travelled. PW.2 Basheer Khan, who was the cleaner of the lorry involved in the accident, has given evidence that Satyanarayana was travelling in the lorry along with the jowar bags. From the evidence of these two witnesses, the only inference that could be drawn is that Satyanarayana was travelling in the lorry in pursuance of a contract of of employment between him and Hallur Halappa. The words 'contract of employment' found in S.95 of the Motor Vehicles Act would cover not only a contract of employment with the owner of the insured vehicle, but would also cover persons who were on the vehicle in pursuance of a contract of employment. (See the decision in Vanguard Insurance Co Ltd, Madras v. Chinnammal, AIR, 1970 Mad. 236.