DIVISIONAL MANAGER Vs. LATHIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/2nd respondent has preferred the present appeal in CMA(MD).No.1305 of 2012, against the judgment and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.106 of 1994, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Judge, Padmanathapuram.

(2.) THE short facts of the case are as follows:- The petitioners, who are the legal heirs of the (deceased) Francis, have filed a claim in M.C.O.P.No.106 of 1994, claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000.00 from the respondent, for the death of the said Francis, who died due to injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. It was submitted that the (deceased) Francis was a Vegetable vendor and earning Rs.3,000.00 per month. On 21.03.1994, when the (deceased) Francis was travelling in the 1st respondents "Mahindra Van" bearing registration No.KL-01C-3506 from Kavalkinaru towards Kottathurai, after purchasing vegetables at 04.00 a.m., when the vehicle was nearing Kalluvillai, the driver of the 1st respondent's vehicle drove the vehicle at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed it against an electrical post situated on the left of the road. Due to the impact, the concrete electrical post was broken and the post fell on top of the (deceased) Francis, who died on the spot. Subsequently, the 1st respondent stopped his vehicle after the vehicle had proceeded ahead for about 100 feet. The other passengers, who travelled in the vehicle also sustained injuries. Hence, the petitioners have filed a claim against the 1st and 2nd respondents, who are the owners and insurer of the said vehicle involved in the accident.

(3.) THE 3rd and 4th respondents, the parents of the deceased Francis have filed a counter stating that the (deceased) Francis, prior to his death, had been giving them as Rs.1,000.00 per month for their maintenance and as such have claimed a compensation of Rs.1,00,000.00 from the 1st and 2nd respondents as the accident had occurred only due to negligence of the 1st respondent.