RAJAN BABURAO PATIL Vs. NAGARBAI SADHU PAWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr. Godbole appearing for the appellants, Mr. Kotak appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 to 5 and Mr. S.R. Singh for respondent No. 6.

(2.) The appellants who are the original opponent Nos. 1 and 2 in a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 have taken exception to the judgment and award dated 18th December, 1997 passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solapur. The respondent-Nos. 1 to 5 were the original claimants before the Tribunal. The name of respondent No. 2 was deleted during the pendency of the claim petition and hence the name of respondent No. 2 has been subsequently deleted from the cause title of the appeal. According to the case of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 to 5 (hereinafter referred to as "the claimants"), on 26th May, 1993 the deceased Sadhu was walking along a public road near Jagdamba Spinning Mill. At that time a Swaraj Mazda vehicle owned by the appellant No. 1 and allegedly driven by appellant No. 2 came in excessive speed and dashed the deceased from his back side. The deceased expired on the spot. The claimants are the legal representatives and dependents of the deceased. According to the claimants, the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the appellant No. 2.

(3.) The appellant No. 2 filed written statement contending that one Kundalik Jalinder Thite was employed as a driver of the said Swaraj Mazda vehicle and the appellant No. 2 was the cleaner though he was holding a valid driving licence. He contended that he was falsely charge-sheeted and was subsequently acquitted. Respondent No. 6 herein which is the Insurance Company with which the said vehicle was insured, filed a written statement contending that the driver was not having necessary licence to drive the vehicle concerned.