KULLAPPAN Vs. MEENAKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As all these appeals rise out of the claim Petitions filed by various persons in respect of the same accident and of the same common order of the Tribunal, it is convenient to deal with them together.

(2.) On 9-9-1976 at about 5-55 P. m. the Lorrv MSN 3785 belonging to the appellant and a taxi MSL 6872 belonging to one Padma Shannmugham collided near Pandiyarajapuram Sugar Mills on the Dindigul Madurai road. As a result of this collision all the 12 passengers in the taxi. including the driver. sustained serious injuries and seven of them died as a result of the injuries. Nine out of the 12 Passengers file d claim petitions. Seven claims related to the seven persons who died and two related to the injured persons. All the nine claim petitions had been filed on the basis that the accident was due exclusively to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver.

(3.) The claim petitions were opposed by the owner of the lorry as well as the Insurance Company with which the lorry had been insured. The owner of the lorry contended that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the taxi, which was heavily overcrowded and which was driven by a person who had no valid licence to drive. His specific case is, that the lorry was trying to overtake a bullock cart going in front and at the time of such overtaking the tourist taxi came and hit the lorry, even though it could have swerved to its left and avoided hitting the lorry. He also contended that in any event the taxi driver has also contributed by his negligence to the accident and therefore the owner of the taxi should also be held jointly liable to pay the compensation for th6 various claimants. It was also contended that the compensation. claimed by the various claimants was high1v excessive.