MAMTA BAI RAJAK Vs. VIJAY KUMAR KASHYAP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the proposed legal representatives of the deceased Applicant No.1 Kush Kumar Rajak under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act, 1988') questioning the legality and propriety of the order dated 24.06.2013 passed in CT No.238/07, by which, the Claims Tribunal has rejected the applications preferred by them under Order 22 Rule 3 of CPC as well as under Order 22 Rule 9 of CPC holding that the claim petition filed under Section 163-A of the Act, 1988 has abated.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 23.01.2007, deceased Satish Kumar Rajak was driving the offending vehicle "TractorTrolley" bearing its registration No. C.G.-10-A-8599 owned by Nonapplicant No.1 Vijay Kumar Kashyap, who was the employer of the deceased. When he was going to load the sand in the Trolley from a ghat situated in Deori, suddenly the front tyre of the vehicle was burst and the vehicle turned turtle. The deceased Satish Kumar was crushed under the Trolley, as a result of which he died on the spot due to the fatal injuries sustained by him. At the relevant time, he was aged about 22 years old and used to earn Rs. 3300/- per month by working as driver under the employment of said Vijay Kumar.

(3.) On account of the aforesaid accident, the Claimants i.e. the grand mother and the brother of the deceased, namely, Smt. Aghan Bai and Kush Kumar instituted a claim petition enumerated under Section 163-A of the Act, 1988 by claiming the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,75,500/- under various heads.