USHA N. DADLANI Vs. A. OBEROI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dated 31st January 1981. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs. 100351/ - with costs and interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum can be sale amount from the date of the award till realisation in the event of the respondents failing to make payment of the awarded amount within 60 days from the date of the award. This award was with respect to that claim of the widow, children and mother of Shri Narender N. Dadlani on account of . his death in an accident which took place on 2nd November 1977 at about 3.20p.m. on outer Ring Road, New Delhi. The deceased was driving a scooter while the Fiat Car which dashed against the deceased was owned by respondent No. 2 and was being driven by respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 3 is the Insurance Company.

(2.) ISSUE No. 1 was decided in favor of the claimants while on Issue No. 2 it was held that there was no negligence on the part of the deceased. On Issue No. 3 it was held that all the claimants were the legal representatives of the deceased and were, therefore, entitled to file the petition. It may be noted here that the mother of the deceased has died during the pendency of the appeal and the only claimants before me are the widow and minor children of the deceased. On Issue No. 4, as already noted, the Tribunal determined the amount of compensation as Rs. 1,00,351/- and awarded the same in favor of the claimants Along with interest and costs.

(3.) IN Gobald Motor Services Ltd. and Anr. v. R.M.K. Veluswami and Ors., the Supreme Court had occasion to pronounce on the approach which the Courts have to adopt in such matters. Though the said decision was not in relation to a case under the Motor Vehicles Act as that was a case under the Fatal Accidents Act 1855, the guidelines approved in the said decision still hold good. It may be worth pointing out that there has been some controversy and there has been a conflict of judicial opinion on the point as to whether the guidelines approved in this decision can be applied in cases under the Motor Vehicles Act since this was a case under the Fatal Accidents Act, yet preponderance of judicial opinion has been in favor of applying the said guidelines in cases arising under the Motor Vehicles Act also. The observations of Viscount Simon made in Nance v. British Columbia Railway Corporation Ltd. 1951 Appeal Cases 601, have been quoted with approval in the said decision. The relevant para is reproduced below.