V.KATHIRAVAN Vs. K.RAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant / petitioner has preferred the present appeal in C.M.A.No.209 of 2001, against the rejection of the claim of compensation made by him in M.C.O.P.No.96 of 1992, on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum First Additional Subordinate Judge, Trichirapalli, dated 21.07.2000.

(2.) THE short facts of the case are as follows:- The petitioners in M.C.O.P.No.1089 of 1991, M.C.O.P.No.96 of 1992 and M.C.O.P.No.1090 of 1991 have filed claims, claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000.00, Rs.1,00,000.00 and Rs.2,00,000.00 from the respondents, for the death of Rukmani, who died to the injuries sustained by her in a motor vehicle accident. It was submitted that on 12.07.1991, at about 1.30 p.m., when the (deceased) Rukmani was riding as a pillion rider in the scooter ridden by the petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.1090 of 1991, and proceeding on the Bell Nagar Road and nearing the Pillaiyar Kovil bus stop and when the scooter was turned from east towards west on the curved road, the first respondent's lorry bearing Registration No.TN45-4633, coming from behind the scooter and driven at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner by its driver dashed against the scooter and caused the accident. In the impact, the (deceased) Rukmani sustained severe injuries and died on the way to the Hospital. The petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.1090 of 1991, sustained severe injuries in his left collar bone and left leg.

(3.) THE first respondent, in his counter has submitted that the petitioners in M.C.O.P.Nos.1089 of 1991 and M.C.O.P.No.96 of 1992 are not the legal-heirs of the deceased Rukmani and as such, the claim is not maintainable. It was submitted that the accident occurred only due to the negligence of the scooter rider. It was submitted that the claim was excessive.