GAURI SHANKAR Vs. SEHRYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of the appeal filed by the owner of the offending vehicle challenging the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby a sum of Rs.42,000/- was awarded as compensation to the respondent for the injuries suffered by him in an accident alleged to have been caused by the rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid vehicle by its driver. A few facts relevant for deciding this appeal are:-

(2.) The respondent was working as a loader in the truck, belonging to the appellant, at the Food Corporation of India at its Naraina Depot, New Delhi; that on 21.3.1985, after loading the bags of wheat, rice and sugar etc. from the FCI Depot, the truck was going to the fair price shop at Najafgarh for delivery; that the respondent alongwith three other paledars was sitting in the said truck for unloading the bags. It was further the case of the respondent that the truck was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver and when the truck reached opposite Nangloi Dairy, it turned on the left side on the kacha road with a view to give side to a DTC bus which was coming from the back; that when the DTC bus came parallel to the truck, the truck driver tried to come back to the pakka road and again turned to the kacha road and in the process lost control of the truck which turned upside down on the slope of the road. The respondent who was sitting at the back side of the truck is alleged to have come under the over-turned truck as a result of which his left leg was broken below the knee. The truck driver immediately ran away from the scene of the accident as he had not received any injuries and the petitioner after being extracted from under the truck by the passengers of another DTC bus, which had come at the spot, was taken to the hospital where his left leg was amputated from above the knee. The petitioner at that time, as already mentioned above, was working as a loader and his monthly income was stated to be between Rs.1000-1200. Claiming that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the truck, the respondent filed an application claiming compensation of Rs.4,56,000/- before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

(3.) In the written statement, the respondent did not deny the ownership of the truck or that the truck was not involved in the accident. It was stated that proper remedy for the respondent was to approach the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation. It was also stated that the respondent was neither an employee engaged by the respondent nor had he any concern with the respondent nor was he travelling in the aforesaid truck nor did he receive any injury while travelling in the truck and as such he was not entitled to any compensation from the appellant. On the pleadings of the parties the Tribunal framed the following issues:-