UNION OF INDIA (UOI) Vs. VARADAMBAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the Union of India represented by the General Officer Commanding, Madras, Mysore and Kerala area, St. Thomas Mount, Madras, against the decision dated 6 -1 -1964 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madras, awarding compensation of Rs. 12,000/ - to the widow and children of one Lakshmanan a hand -cart puller, who sustained fatal injuries as a result of the lorry belonging to the Union of India hitting the handcart. The accident occurred on 2 -1 -1962 about 4 -45 A.M. on the Guindy Adayar Road near Raj Bhavan; The lorry of the Army, known technically as the 'weapons carrier', because it was primarily used for carrying weapons, was going from west to east. It struck the hand -cart which was being pulled by Lakshmanan assisted by his brother, Raman, P.W. 3. The cart was then going on the left side of the road. Injuries were sustained by Lakshmanan and Raman. The injuries of Lakshmanan proved fatal. His widow filed O.P. No. 91 of 1962 on behalf of herself and her minor children. She claimed a sum of Rs. 15,000/ - and stated that her husband had been earning Rs. 150/ - a month.

(2.) THE claim was resisted by the Union of India on trade grounds. (1) The accident was not due to any rash or negligent act on the part of the driver of the weapons carrier. (2) Even if the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle, the Union of India was not liable for the tortious acts of its servants. (3) The amount of compensation claimed was exorbitant.

(3.) ON point (2), what was urged before the Tribunal was that the Union of India would not be liable for the wrongful acts of its servants committed in the performance of duties in exercise of the sovereign powers of the Union. Here, what was urged on the facts was that the vehicle was going to the Central Station to bring Major Kurup. R.W.I,, the driver of the vehicle, gave evidence to that effect. The Union of India has marked an entry in the register, Exhibit -R -1. That, however, did not mention that the weapons carrier was going to the Central Station, but merely mentioned one "residence" as the destination. The clerk who marked the entry could not say anything further. The Tribunal observed: