LAWS(GJH)-1995-7-71

CHIEF OFFICER BHAVNAGAR MUNICIPALITY Vs. BACHUBAHI ARJANBHAI

Decided On July 12, 1995
Chief Officer Bhavnagar Municipality Appellant
V/S
Bachubahi Arjanbhai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have challenged the judgment and order dated 13-7-1979 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Bhavnagar awarding compensation of Rs. 21 0 with interest at 7 1/2 per cent per annum to the claimants against the appellants.

(2.) In a motor accident that took place on November 29 1978 on Gogha Road at Bhavnagar one Dahyabhai Bachubhai died and therefore his parents and minor brother and sister referred the Claim Petition against the driver the State of Gujarat who was the owner of the vehicle and the Bhavnagar Municipality i.e. the appellant No. 1 (now Municipal Corporation) who had used the vehicle through its driver-the appellant No. 2. It was found by the Tribunal that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the appellant No. 2 of tanker No. GTP 4645 which had dashed against the deceased while he was walking by the road side. The deceased was 19 years of age doing masonary work but the Tribunal assessed his income only at Rs. 200.00 per month. Applying the multiplier of 15 and assessing the dependency at Rs. 100.00 per month the Tribunal calculated the economic loss to the claimants at Rs. 18 0 and adding to that some conventional figure of Rs. 3 0 on the count of loss of expectation of life awarded Rs. 21 0 to them.

(3.) The only contention which is raised on behalf of the appellants was that the Tribunal had committed an error in holding that the appellant Municipality was vicariously liable for the tort committed by its driver and that the present respondent No. 5-State of Gujarat was not liable as the owner of the vehicle. As the State of Gujarat was held not to be liable because it had allotted the tanker to the Municipality for distribution of water. to the citizens the Insurance Company which is respondent No. 6 in this appeal also could not be liable. In fact the Insurance Company was not impleaded as a party in the claim petition but the Tribunal had issued a notice to the Insurance Company and given it an opportunity of hearing in the matter as required by the law.