NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. VIJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above C.M.As. arise out of M.A.C.T.O.P. Nos. 1846, 1916 and 1855 of 1992 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Salem. These three claim petitions arose out of a single accident in which the petitioner in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1846 of 1992 and the petitioner in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1855 of 1992 were injured and one Manikandan died and his parents filed M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1916 of 1992. In M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1846 of 1992, as against the claim for Rs. 1,00,000 the injured Vijay Kumar was awarded Rs. 53,850. In M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1855 of 1992, as against a claim for Rs. 50,000, the injured Muralidharan was awarded Rs. 25,000. In M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1916 of 1992, as against the claim for Rs. 5,00,000, Rs. 2,20,000 was awarded. Common questions arise for decision and the C.M.As. are disposed of by following order.

(2.) THE injured -claimants and the deceased were travelling in a jeep bearing registration No. TAT 4946. The jeep dashed against rocks and trees on Yercaud Ghat Road, resulting in the accident. The Tribunal held that the accident was only due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver. It is not necessary to go into that question as this finding is not seriously challenged, cannot also be challenged, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. This finding is confirmed. The points raised by learned Counsel for the appellant in the C.M.As. are:

(3.) M .A.C.T.O.P. No. 1846 of 1992 was disposed of by one officer and the other two M.A.C.T.O.Ps., namely, 1855 and 1916 of 1992, were disposed of by another officer. Though this is not very material, only for the sake of record this is noticed. On the side of the appellant insurance company in all the appeals, its official was examined as RW 1 before the Tribunal.