UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. JASWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Final arguments in these appeals were heard on 19 th August, 2011. Counsel for the parties were given time to file the written submissions within one week. Though this Court has waited for almost two weeks, no such written submissions have been filed by either parties. Thus, without waiting any further, it is deemed proper to pronounce the judgment on the basis of oral submissions of the counsel for the parties, pleadings in the appeal and trial court record.

(2.) Two petitions were filed by the two sets of claimants, as a result of singular accident which took place on 27 th November, 2001 at about 1.20 a.m. On that ill-fated night, two persons, viz., Devender Singh and Kapil Kumar were travelling by twowheeler scooter No. DL 2SF 2032, when the scooter was hit against the rear of a truck tailor No. HR 26GA 2301, which was parked in the middle of the road without headlights. Both the occupants died. Both of them were aged about 20 years. They were unmarried. By Claim Petitions compensation was sought under Section 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by their respective parents (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimants'). These petitions have been decided vide a common award dated 24 th August, 2005 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, New Delhi ('the Tribunal' for brevity), granting compensation of ' 5,12,400/- to the parents of Devender Singh and ' 4,21,950/- to the parents of Kapil Kumar. Interest @ 6% is also awarded to both sets of claimants. In both these petitions, the claimants had impleaded Pawan Kumar, owner of the truck as the respondent No.1 and the appellant, the insurer of the truck as the respondent No.2. The owner of the vehicle simply shifted the burden on the insurance company on the ground that the truck, i.e., the offending vehicle was comprehensively insured. The insurance company took up the plea that the deceased themselves were liable for their negligent driving. Following issues were framed:

(3.) Claimant Jaswant Singh examined himself as PW1, Hari Kishan as PW2, an eye-witness and claimant Dharam Singh examined himself as PW3. No evidence whatsoever was led by Shri Pawan Kumar or the appellant-Insurance company.