KILARI MAMMI Vs. BARIUM CHEMICALS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a motor accident that occurred at about 3 P.M. on 22-1-1972 in the fancy shop of Shah Pratapji Kanmal in the main Bazar of Kothagudem. a number of articles in the shop were damaged. Kilari Mammi of Kothagudem who had come to the shop to purchase fancy goods received grievous injuries; Jaber Singh a boy aged 13 years who was working as the sales boy in the shop also received grievous injuries The managing partner of the Said fancy goods shop (who shall hereinafter be referred to as "the first petitioner") filed O. P No. 54 of 1972 claiming Rs. 10,914-95 Ps for the estimated damage to the property caused by the motor accident. Kalari Mammi (who shall hereinafter be referred to as the second petitioner) and Jaber Singh. (hereinafter referred to as the third petitioner) Bled O P. Nos. 55 and 58 of 1972 each claiming Rs. 9,500.00 and Rs. 7,500.00 respectively, as damages for the bodily injuries and mental agony suffered by each one of them. The respondents in all the three original petitions are common The first respondent, the Barium Chemicals Ltd, which is a Firm having its headquarters at Ramavaram, adjacent to Kothagudem, in the owner of the jeep bearing Registration No, A.P.H 1502 which was involved in the accident. The second respondent Ch. Satyanarayana, was a clerk cum-store keeper of the first respondent and the third respondent was the driver of the said jeep and was an employees of the first respondent. The 4th respondent is the New India Fire & General Insurance Company, Bombay, with whom the jeep A.P.H. 1502 was insured.

(2.) The case of the petitioners shortly Stated is as follows: On 22-1-1972 at about 3 P.M. the shop of the first petitioner was open The Second petitioner had come to the shop with her daughter. She was purchasing Some fancy goods The third petitioner was working in the Shop. While so, a deep A.P.H. 1502 driven by the second respondent rushed into the shop and dashed against the racks in which the fancy articles were kept. Due to the rash and negligent driving of the second respondent, some articles in the shop (were) damaged and Some others were destroyed the second petitioner sustained fracture of her legs and hands and the third petitioner sustained fracture of his two legs. The Second and third Petitioners were rushed to the Hospital at Khammam The first petitioner immediately gave a report to the Police who came to the shop of the first petitioner and conducted a panchanama regarding the damage caused to the property of the 1st petitioner, Ex. A-2 is the certified copy of the panchanama . The Police filed charge-sheet against the second respondent in C. C, No. 81 of 1972 under Ss. 338 and 337, I, P. C and under S. 3 of the Motor Vehicle, Act for rash and negligent driving, before the Judicial First Class Magistrate. Kothugudem. The second respondent was convicted under Ss. 338 and 337, I.P.C and 5. 3 of the Motor Vehicles act and he was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100.00, Rs. 50.00 and Rs. 20.00 respectively under each court. Ex, A-5 is the certified copy of the judgment.

(3.) The first petitioner got notice issued through his advocate, the Office copy of which is Ex. A-19 , to respondents 1 and 2 claiming sum of Rs. 10,914-95 Ps. being the damage to the property suffered by the first (petitioner) as a result of the accident according to the panchanama at A-2 prepared by the Sub-Inspector of police, Kothagudem. The first respondent got a reply notice issued admitting that the second respondent was its employee but he was only a clerk, that he was not entrusted with any such work such as driving the jeep and therefore, the first respondent was not responsible for the negligent driving of the jeep by the second respondent. Thereupon, the first petitioner filed O: P. No. 54/1972 claiming damages against the four respondents. It is contended in the petition that the insurance Company is liable to pay damages under the terms of the Insurance Policy, Ex. B-2 dated 4-8-1971 issued by the 4th respondent. The second and third petitioners similarly tiled O. P. Nos. 55 and 56 of 1972 against the four respondents claiming as damages Rs. 9,500.00 and Rs. 7,500.00 respectively for the bodily injuries and mental agony suffered by each of them.