NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. M MALLAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these appeals arise out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 19-3-90 at Gadderegadi village at 2 p.m. Several persons were injured and several persons died due to the accident. Therefore the injured persons and the legal representatives of the deceased filed claim petitions before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum District Judge, Adilabad under Sec. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the driver of the lorry, owner of the lorry and the Insurance Company with which lorry was insured. After enquiry, the Tribunal passed common award dt. 2-6-93 in OP Nos. 285/91, 287/91, 459/91, 289/91, 286/91 and some other OPs and Award dt. 9-7-93 in OP No.190/92. Aggrieved by the awards, the Insurance Company (R-3) filed CMA No. 54/94 against OP No. 285/91 which was filed by the wife, sons and daughter of Guruvaiah. CMA No.58/94 is filed against OP No.190/92 which was filed by the petitioner for the injuries suffered by him. CMA No. 65/94 is filed against OP No. 287/91 which was filed by the father and mother of the deceased Venkati. CMA No. 66/94 is filed against OP No. 459/91 which was filed by the wife, two daughters and mother of the deceased Kistaiah. CMA No.68/94 is filed against OP No.289/91 which was filed by the injured Mallamma. CMA No.69/94 is filed against OP No.288/91 whichwas filed by mother and wife of the deceased Pochaiah. CMA No.70/94 is filed against OP No.286/91 which was filed by the father and mother of the deceased Mallesh.

(2.) As the common questions of law and facts in all these appeals arise, I am disposing them of by this common judgment.

(3.) The facts not in dipute are: On 19-3-90 some persons were waiting at Somagudem Chowrasta to go to Venkatraopet. By that time, the second respondent was coming in the lorry bearing No. MWP 7051 from Devapur and stopped the vehicle and asked the persons to board the vehicle along with their goods on payment of hire charges. The abovesaid persons paid charges towards goods and board the lorry and kept their goods in the lorry. All the above persons travelled in the lorry as owner of the goods. Because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry, the lorry turned turtle and fell into the ditch near Gaddaregadi village at 2 p.m. Due to that accident, Guruvaiah, Venkatai, Kistaiah, Pochaiah and Mallesh and two others died and Hanmanthu and Mallamma received injuries. The police of Ramakrishnapur Police Station registered a case against the driver of the lorry under Sections 304-A, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and other sections of Motor Vehicles Act. Hence, the petitioner/ petitioners filed the claim petitions, as stated supra, for claiming compensation ranging from Rs. 75,000/- to Rs. 1,50,000/-. The said OPs were contested by the second respondent by filing counters. He contended that the accident did not occur on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry. At the time of entering into the employment, the second respondent had given specific instructions not to carry any passengers in the lorry and not to allow any quantities of goods on the way. At the relevant time, the second respondent specifically instructed and authorised the first respondent to bring the cement load from Devapur. If the driver allowed any person or persons as passengers even with small quantities of goods, he cannot be held liable to pay the compensation.