MAHIPALPUR CO OP SOCIETY LTD Vs. PRABHATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RamLal son of Narain Singh, aged 40 years resident of J. J. Colony, Tigri, Khanpur, New Delhi met with a fatal accident on the afternoon of 21st October, 1979 near Khanpur-Delhi Road Turn at Mehrauli Badarpur Road, New Delhi. Smt. Prabhati, widow respondent No. 1, Smt. Chandri Devi, mother-respondent No. 3; Shankar Lal, son and Smt. Bhori Devi, daughter from his first wife, respondents 2 and 4, Mona Devi. Manohar Devi, Ghota Devi, Prem Nath and Dina Nath, minor children-respondents 5 to 9 filed an Application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 claiming compensation Rs. 1,80,000 on account of fatal injury sustained by Ram Lal. The respondents in their claim petition have alleged that Ram LaL The respondents in their claim petition have alleged that Ram Lal met with fatal accident on 21st October, 1979 at about 3 P.M.; the driver of the Bus No. 2322 hit the deceased who was standing with his friend Bangru Lal at the road berm (kaccha); the deceased was hit by the bus, he was thrown ahead and thereafter was run over by the bus; the driver ran away from the site; the deceased was taken to All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi but he was declared dead. Mahipalpur Co-Operative Society Ltd., appellant No. 1 is the owner of the bus while Hari Ram, appellant No. 2 was driving the bus. Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co. Ltd., appellant No. 3 is the insurer of the said vehicle.

(2.) The appellants contested the claim. Their defence was that the deceased was a passenger travelling in the bus in (question from Badarpur to Khanpur and when the bus reached near Khanpur bus stop, he jumped out without waiting for the bus to stop and thus the accident occurred due to negligence: of the deceased and the appellants ware not at ail liable for any compensation. The 'Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has that the respondents are heirs and legal representatives of the deceased Ram Lal. the accident resulting in his death took place due; to lash and negligent driving of the bus DEP 2322 by Hari Ram, Driver (R.W. 1); the deceased Ram Lal had not jumped of the bus, but was hitt by the and thereafter ran over under the rear wheel. The Tribunal has further held that the minimum income of the deceased was Rs. 800 per month. By applying a multiplier of 15 the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 81,700 as comprehensation after excluding 1/3rd salary for his personal expenses and 15 per cent deduction on account of lumpsum payment; and the maximum liability of the insurer has been held to be Rs. 50,000. The Tribunal directed the appellants to deposit the compensation amount within three months failing which it awarded interest@ 6 percent per annum from the date of the award till realisation.

(3.) The appellants have filed this appeal claiming dismissal of the compensation application and the respondents have filed cross-objections claiming enhancement of compensation as claimed in theirs application, Leased counsel for the appellants submils that the. accident was not caused on account of rash or negligent act of the driver of the bus; that the deceased jumped out of the bus as soon as it reached near .Khanpur bus stand without waiting for the bus to stop and thus the deceased himself was responsible for his death. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submits that Ram Lal died due to injuries sustained by him on account of the rash and negligent driving by Hari Ram driver, that the bus first hit the deceased and then he was run over by the bus. He submits that the respondents arc entitled to compensation Rs. 1,80,000 with interest at 12 per cent per annum and there should be no deduction on account of lump sum payment; that the Tribunal erred in deducting 1/3rd amount of the salary as personal expenses. Two questions arise in this appeal :