SATNAM SINGH Vs. MAYA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, preferred under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed against the judgment/ award dated 15.6.2004 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, whereby in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 234 of 2002, an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,30,000 has been directed to be paid by the owner of vehicle to the claimants.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 24.5.2002, Rajesh Kumar (deceased) was going on a motor cycle registration No. UP 47-2951 from Rudrapur to Kashipur. When he reached near village Maheshpura at Rudrapur-Kashipur Road, a truck registration No. UHJ 9049, which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, dashed at his motor cycle. Consequently, the motor cycle got unbalanced and dashed at another standing truck registration No. UP 04-A 0574. As a result of which Ra- jesh Kumar died due to injuries sustained by him. A first information report was lodged at the Police Station, Bazpur. At the time of his death, the deceased was aged 29 years. It is alleged that his income was Rs. 7,000 per month. The truck registration No. UP 04-A 0574 was owned by Satnam Singh, appellant, while truck registration No. UHJ 9049 was owned by Rajendra Sharma, respondent. The truck registration No. UP 04-A 0574 was insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Kashipur with policy cover note No. 995333, while truck registration No. UHJ 9049 was insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd., Kashipur. The claimant-respondent Maya Devi is mother of the deceased. The claimants- respondents Rakesh Kumar and Pradeep Kumar are brothers of the deceased and claimant-respondent Poonam is sister of the deceased. The claimants sought compensation to the tune of Rs. 20,00,000 by filing the Claim Petition No. 232 of 2002 before Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Udham Singh Nagar. The claim petition was contested by both the truck owners and both the insurance companies. In the written statement of Rajendra Sharma, owner of truck registration No. UHJ 9049, the contents of the claim petition are denied. However, it is stated that compensation, if any, payable, is to be paid by National Insurance Co. Ltd., with whom truck registration No. UHJ 9049 was insured under the policy cover note No. 025145. Satnam Singh, appellant, owner of the other truck registration No. UP 04-A 0574 has also denied the contents of the claim petition and has alleged that liability, if any, to pay the amount of compensation lies with New India Assurance Co. Ltd., with whom his truck was insured under policy cover note No. 995333. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. has filed its own written statement denying the contents of the claim petition with additional pleas that no information of the accident was provided to it under section 158 (6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is further alleged that, even otherwise the motorcyclist had a contributory negligence in the accident. It is also pleaded that the motor cycle was not insured with any insurance company, as such the answering respondent is not liable to make any payment. Lastly, it is pleaded that the truck registration No. UP 04-A 0574 was a standing truck and there can be no liability as against said truck. Consequently, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. is not liable to make any payment. National Insurance Co. Ltd. filed its own written statement denying the contents of the claim petition with the similar additional pleas as above. This insurance company with whom truck registration No. UHJ 9049 was insured, has pleaded that the terms of the policy disentitled the owner to be compensated by the insurance company in the impugned accident. The learned Tribunal after framing the issues, recording the evidence and hearing the parties, has awarded an amount to the tune of Rs. 5,30,000 against Satnam Singh, owner of the truck registration No. UP 04-A 0574. Aggrieved by which, this appeal has been preferred by him.

(3.) We heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.