S JAYAKUMAR Vs. TAMIL CHELVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The owner of the vehicle and the insurance company are the appellants. The above civil miscellaneous appeal is filed against the award of Rs. 4,00,000 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Kancheepuram in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 160 of 1991 filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 6 herein, claiming compensation in a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 for the death of one Shanmugavel, husband of the respondent No. 1, father of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and son of the respondent No. 6, in an accident involving the vehicle belonging to the appellant No. 1 and insured with the appellant No. 2.

(2.) The case of the claimants was as follows: On 22.3.1991 at about 10.00 a.m., when the deceased Shanmugavel was on his way to the house in a bicycle, a car bearing the registration No. TSI 7346 belonging to the appellant No. 1, driven by its driver, the respondent No. 7 herein, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against him causing grievous injuries to which he succumbed on the way to the hospital. At the time of his death, Shanmugavel was 30 years old. He was hale and hearty. Besides being a village postmaster earning Rs. 750 p.m., he owned extensive lands, which he was supervising and getting considerable income for the family. The claimants filed a claim petition for Rs. 4,00,000 though according to them they were entitled to claim Rs. 6,00,000 as and by way of compensation.

(3.) The appellant No. 2 insurance company resisted the petition contending, inter alia, that the driver of the vehicle drove the car at a normal speed, that at Chinnaiyan Chathram bus stand two buses were standing and the passengers were alighting and getting in, that the driver of the vehicle, the respondent No. 7 was driving the vehicle, putting on the front lights and at that time another bus was coming from the opposite direction; that when the deceased was coming out in his cycle from between two buses standing in the bus stand, the car dashed against the cycle resulting in his death and that the accident was entirely due to negligence of the deceased. The appellant No. 2 further contended that in any event the claim for Rs. 4,00,000 was highly exaggerated. It also disputed the age and income and other particulars given in the petition.