SARASKSHY Vs. KRISHNANKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in M.F.A. 403/86, who were petitioners before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, challenge the quantum of compensation granted to them, by seeking enhancement, whereas the appellant in M.F.A. 381/87, the Insurance Company, challenges the very jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the claim petition filed by the appellants in M.F.A. 403/86.

(2.) The appellants in M.F.A. 403/86 are the widow and children of Velayudhan Nadar, who died as a result of severe burns sustained by him in an accident. The deceased was an agriculturist and an independent contractor. He owned in from of his house, double storied building. All the ten rooms in the building were rented out and one of the tenants was running a kerosene oil depot. On 17-12-1979, a tanker lorry belonging to the 1st respondent in M.F.A. 403/86 brought kerosene to the above depot by about 8 P.M. It is the case of the appellants that deceased Velayudhan Nadar was used to he employed for transferring the kerosene from the tanker lorry to the barrels kept in the depot along with the regular employees in the tanker lorry, namely respondents 2,4 and 5 in M.F.A. 403/86. It is said that the skilled portion of the work, namely opening the tanker, connecting the barrels etc., was being done always by the regular employees and the deceased joined them to complete the remaining work. On 17-12-1979, while the deceased was thus engaged in filling the empty barrels with kerosene brought in the tanker lorry, due to no fault of his, a spark appeared from under the tanker and immediately the kerosene caught fire. As a result, the oil tanker, the oil depot, the entire building and about 20 coconut trees standing in the property belonging to the deceased, gutted in fire. The deceased, in spite of his desperate attempt, could not save himself from the fire. He sustained severe burn injuries and was hospitalised in the Government Taluk Hospital, Neyyattinkara and then transferred to Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. He succumbed to the injuries at 10 p.m. on 19-12-1979.

(3.) It is the case of the appellants in M.F.A. 403/86 that the accident happened due to the negligence of the owner of the oil tanker and his employees. They claimed Rs. 1,51,000/- as compensation for loss of property and loss on account of the death of Velayudhan Nadar. Respondents 1 and 3 in M.F.A. 403/86 contended before the Tribunal that the petition was not maintainable as the accident was not a motor vehicle accident and the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the claim. It was further contended by the Ist respondent that deceased Velayudhan Nadar was never engaged by the first respondent for decanting kerosene from the oil tanker to the barrels, that the deceased sustained the injury due to gross negligence on his part and that the amount claimed was exorbitant.