BHAGYACHANDRA SHAMRAO SUKHTANKAR Vs. MANGALA YESHWANT KEWALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this First Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant (original opponent) has impugned the judgment and award dated 24th March, 2000 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as "M.A.C.T., Mumbai" for short) allowing the Application No. 1153 of 1992 filed by the respondent nos. 1 to 5 and directing the appellant to pay sum of Rs.9,30,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of the said application till the date of realization. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this First Appeal are as under :-

(2.) The appellant herein was the opponent in the Application No. 1153 of 1992 and the respondents herein were the original applicants before the M.A.C.T., Mumbai. It was the case of the respondents that the husband of the respondent no.1, who was father of the respondent nos.2 and 3 and son of the respondent nos. 4 and 5, Shri Yashwant Sitara Kewale was riding his scooter bearing registration no.MHL-7559 on Mankhurd - Ghatkopar Link Road at about 6:30 p.m. When he was opposite O.N.G.C. Quarters at Govandi, car bearing registration no. MGR-8524 (hereinafter referred to as "said offending vehicle" for short) being driven by the appellant in a rash and negligent manner violently dashed the said scooter driven by the said deceased who died on the spot. The said offending vehicle was not insured with any insurance company. The said deceased was a medical practitioner with MBBS degree and was working in that capacity with the Bombay Municipal Corporation. He was also a Writer and a Photographer.

(3.) The respondents filed an application before the said Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 inter-alia praying for compensation against the appellant in the sum of Rs.10 lakhs with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of the said application. The said application was resisted by the appellant by filing written statement. The said Tribunal framed 4 issues. The respondents examined the respondent no.1 as one of the witness. They also examined an Administrative Officer from Public Health Department of Bombay Municipal Corporation (PW-3). The respondents examined Mr. Laluram Omkar (PW-2) who was a Police Constable and who was then working at Deonar Police Station. The appellant also examined himself and another witness. All these witnesses were cross-examined by the advocate appearing for the other side. By a judgment and award dated 24th March, 2000, the Tribunal directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.9,30,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of the said application till realization. The appellant filed this appeal impugning the said judgment and award dated 24th March, 2000.