NARAIN DEVI Vs. SWARN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In an accident which took place on 6.1.1969, Duli Chand who was travelling in tempo vehicle No. DLL 3939 died due to impact caused by truck No. PNF 4979 and also by truck No. PNE 6300. It appears from the vehicle inspection report that the front truck and the tempo struck each other head-on and the rear truck No. PNE 6300 got involved because of the impact. The Tribunal has found that there was composite negligence on the part of the front truck No. PNF 4979 and the rear truck No. PNE 6300. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 15,440.00 as compensation to the claimants. The claimants are the widow and five children and the father of the deceased.

(2.) The Oriental Fire & Genl. Ins. Co. Ltd. with whom the rear truck No. PNE 6300 was insured has filed the cross-objection submitting that the Tribunal has not properly judged the role of the said truck only because the driver of the truck was not examined and has held that there was composite negligence of both the trucks. Counsel for the objector has submitted that the Tribunal ought to have apportioned the liability for the purpose of payment of compensation. I will dispose of the cross-objection first.

(3.) The cross-objector/insurance company cannot challenge the merits of the award, the fact of the accident and the involvement of the vehicles. Whether the apportionment of liability can be made by the court in a case of composite liability is the only question that can be argued by the insurance company. The finding is that it is not a case of contributory negligence, but of composite negligence. It is yet to be decided as to the proportion in which the two vehicles misconducted or offended. The law, therefore, is that the liability of the tortfeasors is joint and several. The Tribunal was quite right in recording the said finding. The cross-objection is, therefore, dismissed.