(1.) This appeal has been filed by the owner and insurer of the vehicle which was involved in an accident against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Coimbatore (East) at Erode in M. C. O. P. No. 12 of 1971 awarding a compensation of Rs. 50,000 (Rs. fifty thousand only) to the first respondent herein for the death of her son, Kulasekaran. The first respondent herein has filed a memorandum of cross-objections claiming a further compensation of Rupees 20,000.
(2.) On 12-7-1970, one Kulasekaran, the son of the first respondent herein aged about 23 years, studying in the final year B. E. in the Government Engineering College at Karupuur was driving a new Ambassador car which had not been registered, from Bhavani to Guruvareddiyur on the Bhavani-Mettur road. In the opposite direction a convoy of forty Ambassador cars was proceeding from Calcutta to Kerala. At about 12.15 P.M. there was a collision between the car driven by Kulasekaran and the 8th car in the convoy. WGK 9095 coming in the opposite direction. As a result of the collision the said Kulasekaran sustained injuries and ultimately died in the hospital at Madras, a few days later after undergoing operation. The driver of the 8th car in the convoy which was involved in the accident was prosecuted and found guilty under Sections 304-A and 337, I. P. C. and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months in C. C. No. 360 of 1970 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Erode.
(3.) On the ground that the accident was solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the car WGK 9095 by its driver, the first respondent herein, filed a claim petition M. C. 0. P. No. 12 of 1971, claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the said claim petition the driver, the owner and the insurer had been made parties. The owner of the vehicle, the second respondent in the O. P. contended that the car WGK 9095 was not driven in a rash and negligent manner that the vehicle was driven carefully and cautiously, that the deceased was driving the car bearing no registration number at a dangerous speed that he while attempting to overtake a stationary vehicle unmindful of the on-coming convoy of cars hit the vehicle WGK 9095 that the accident took place purely due to the rash and negligent driving of, the deceased, and his overlooking the elementary rules of the road, that the third respondent, the driver of the car WGK 9095 was not at all responsible for the accident, that if he had not turned a little to his left to avoid a head on collision, a more gruesome tragedy would have occurred, that the accident took place due to the irresponsible act of the deceased, that the third respondent never swerved his car to the right and, therefore, there was no possibility of his car hitting against the deceased's car and, therefore, neither the owner, nor the driver or the insurer of the vehicle - WGK 9095 is liable for the accident. He also contended that the deceased and the other injured were taken to the Bhavani hospital and thereafter to Erode and given treatment, that the injuries were not of such a serious nature as to cause death, that the taking of the deceased to Madras and subjecting him to an operation should be taken to be at the risk of the deceased and that, in any event, the quantum of compensation claimed is exhorbitant, imaginary and unconscionable and that the social status of the deceased his wealth and attainments of personal nature are of little value in the matter of quantification of compensation. The first respondent, Messrs Hindu Motors Ltd., who was the manufacturer of the car WGK 9095 disclaimed liability on the ground that the title of the vehicle had passed to the second respondent, Messrs Maricar Motors Ltd. The third respondent in the claim petition who is the driver of the vehicle adopted the counter statement filed by the second respondent. The fourth and fifth respondents who are the insurers of the vehicle also filed a counter adopting the second respondent's counter.