RAMCHANDRA SINDJI CHAUHAN Vs. HARIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI KOTHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal arises out of the common judgment and award dated 22.01.1997 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Surendranagar (the Tribunal) in M.A.C.P. Nos.340/93, 380/93 and allied matters. THE present appeal relates to claimant of M.A.C.P. No.380/93, wherein the Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,61,300/- holding the present appellants and respondent No.3, the insurance company, jointly and severally liable, along with interest @ 12% from the date of the application till realization.

(2.) THE facts arising out of the present appeal are that the claimant was occupying the front seat of the car of his friend-Dr. Arvindkumar S. Mehta, bearing Registration No. GAY-9044. THE claimant had gone for pilgrimage to Shree Nathdwara and was returning back at about 1.00 a.m. on 06.12.1992. THE car was being driven by the owner of the car, respondent No.2 herein, on Ahmedabad-Rajkot Highway and was proceeding towards Rajkot. It is the case of the claimant that the truck owned by the present appellants bearing Registration No.GJ-15-T-1081 was coming towards Ahmedabad from Rajkot. It is particularly the case of the claimant that the driver of the truck, appellant No.1 herein, was driving the truck on the wrong side of the road in rash and negligent manner, with excessive speed and with full light. It is the case of the claimant that as soon as the driver of the car saw the truck coming on the wrong side, he slowed down the speed of his vehicle and took it further extreme on the left of the road. It is the case of the claimant that because of the excessive speed and careless and negligent driving of the truck, appellant No.1 had lost control over the truck and dashed it with the motorcar resulting into accident. It is the case of the claimant that all passengers travelling in the car received serious injuries and the car was heavily damaged due to the said accident. It is also the case of the claimant that front portion of the car smashed in such a manner that the radiator, battery, right head light, including A/c. machine of the car, etc., were completely damaged.

(3.) IT may be noted that originally the present appeal was preferred by the driver of the truck appellant No.1, owner of the truck - appellant No.2 as well as the present respondent No.3-Insurance company. Thereafter this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 11.08.2008 passed in Civil Application No.2784 of 2008 permitted the original appellant No.3-Insurance Company to be transposed as respondent No.3 in the present appeal and hence, the present appeal is filed by the original opponents i.e. the driver and the owner of the truck.