MARKANDEY SINGH Vs. CHANMUNI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the aforesaid appeals are arising out of the judgment and award passed in the claim petitions in connection with the selfsame accident, in which one has died and another injured. Both the owner and the driver of the vehicle in question have been fastened with the liability of payment of awarded amount of compensation jointly or severally for a sum of rs. 1,22,000/- along with interest in case of death and a sum of Rs. 80,000/-along with interest in case of injury.

(2.) BY preferring both the appeals the owner, appellant herein, contended that the finding of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is perverse in nature. In support of his contention, he has stated that due to such accident two persons died and one became injured. Three claim petitions were filed in the Court below and were placed before Mr. S. K. Pandey, IV Additional Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Gorakhpur. Evidences were taken before him. Out of three claim petitions, two claim petitions were taken up by Sri R. S. Tripathi, the then District Judge, who was also the Judge of the Motor Accidents Claims tribunal. No credence was given on the identical evidence led before the other tribunal, wherein one of the claim petition was heard and all three i. e. the owner, the insurance company and the driver were fastened with the liability jointly or severally. Two questions are involved herein. Firstly, whether the driver was holding the valid driving licence and running the vehicle rashly and negligently; and secondly, whether the vehicle was not used as private car but as taxi without such insurance coverage? In the two claim petitions only the owner and the driver were held responsible leaving aside the insurance company in total contravention with the judgment and award passed by a different parallel tribunal on 7th February, 2000 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 541 of 1996, Smt. Kasturba Ojha and others v. Markandey Singh and others.

(3.) SO far as the question of driving licence is concerned, the learned Judge has relied upon the. evidence adduced by the parties before another Court, which disposed of the M. A. C. P. No. 541 of 1996 on 7th February, 2000. The tribunal held as under:-