STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. GULABI SUDHU GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State of Maharashtra, the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident has preferred this appeal against the order and judgment awarding Rs. 50,000 as compensation with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the application till payment in favour of the present respondents who have filed the application under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act to claim compensation on account of death of Sudhu Gupta, the husband of the present Respondent no. 1, father of Respondents No, 2 and 3 and the son of Respondents No. 4 and 5.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under :-Sudhu Gupta admittedly met with an accident on 13th Road, Aarey colony, Gpregaon on 1-9-1974 at about 10. 30 a m. as a result of dash given to him by a tractor bearing No. MRX 3644 belonging to the present appellant and driven by its employee. Sudhu Gupta was walking by the left side of the road. The tractor belonging to the present appellant came from behind and dashed against the deceased resulting in fatal injuries to the deceased. The respondents-claimants alleged that the said tractor was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and the driver of the tractor had not blown the horn and was actually looking behind and therefore the accident took place the deceased was working as a labourer and it is claimed that he was earning about Rs. 15 per day. It is also claimed that he was maintaining his four children, wife and parents. It is also claimed that the deceased was of the age of 35 years at the time of his death. The respondents therefore claimed that as deceased died as a result of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the tractor who was employee of the present appellant, the appellant is liable to pay claim of Rs. 50,000 as compensation.

(3.) THE present appellant filed its written statement and refuted the liability. The appellant also contended that the appellant was not aware of the facts appearing in Paras 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the application of the claimants. The appellant also contended that the claim of the claimants was exorbitant. It also appears that the additional written statement was also filed subsequently by the present appellant contending therein that the place where the accident took place is a private road of Aarey Milk Colony and the deceased was a trespasser and therefore was not entitled to any compensation or damages as the deceased himself was negligent and had unauthorisedly trespassed on the private property and private road of the appellant.