BIR SINGH RAWAT Vs. VIRENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of an award dated 29.3.1979 passed by learned District Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in Motor Accident Claim petition No. 202 of 1974 where under Claim of the present appellants has been rejected. Beer Singh, appellant No. 1, father of one Kirti Singh along with widow of his son and two minor grand-sons and one minor grand-daughter filed Claim petition No. 202 of 1974 Claiming compensation on account of death of Kirti Singh, who was aged about 33 years at the time of death, in motor accident which took place on 16.4.1974, at about 1.00 P.M. on Rishikesh Tehri road at 21 mile near Fakot. The deceased Kirti Singh was travelling in unfortunate bus No. U.P.S. 5731 which met an accident at the aforesaid place and fell down in a sleep khud resulting in death of several persons and causing injuries to many others. The appellants claimed Rs. One lakh as compensation on many counts.

(2.) CLAIM of the appellants was resisted by respondents Nos. 1 and 2 on all possible legal and factual pleas. Respondent No. 1 Virendra Kumar denied even the fact that he is owner of the bus. It was also denied that Bir Singh died in that accident in which the aforesaid bus was involved. Both parties were given opportunity to adduce evidence. Appellants adduced oral and documentary evidence. In oral evidence they examined Bir Singh appellant and police head constable Pitamber Singh. Besides oral evidence following documents were also filed in support of the Claim:

(3.) THE learned Tribunal, however, rejected the claim of appellants merely on the ground that the claimants failed to establish that Kirti Singh deceased died in the accident in which aforesaid bus No. U.P.S. 5731 was involved. It has further been said that as death of Kirti Singh in the accident could not be established, it was not necessary to record any finding as to whether the vehicle was driven rashly and negligently at the time of the accident. It has also been said simultaneously that there is no such evidence on record on the basis of which it may be inferred that the vehicle was driven rashly and negligently. So far as the amount of compensation is concerned, it has been said by the learned Tribunal that even if the amount of compensation is awarded it would have been offset against the acceleration of the estate in their favour.