STATE OF M P Vs. SOMLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment following misc. appeals are being finally heard and decided. A tabular formation has been arranged for the purpose of understanding the nature of these appeals, the cause of action and the claims preferred and the amounts awarded to the claimants. In all these appeals the State is assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the judgment and awards passed by the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kukshi in 18 claim cases resulting into misc. appeals as mentioned below: <FRM> M.A. No. Title Death/Injury Amount 349 of 1993 State v. Somla Death Rs. 50,000 350 of 1993 State v. Tersingh Injury Rs. 3,000 351 of 1993 State v. Kekdia Death Rs. 50,000 352 of 1993 State v. Naharsingh Death Rs. 50,000 354 of 1993 State v. Mehtabsingh Injury Rs. 3,000 355 of 1993 State v. Laxman Injury Rs. 4,000 356 of 1993 State v. Madhosingh Injury Rs. 15,000 357 of 1993 State v. Veersingh Injury Rs. 10,300 358 of 1993 State v. Raju Injury Rs. 5,000 359 of 1993 State v. Bhurla Death Rs. 50,000 360 of 1993 State v. Gulabsingh Injury Rs. 3,000 361 of 1993 State v. Kalu Death Rs. 50,000 362 of 1993 State v. Lalu Death Rs. 50,000 363 of 1993 State v. Thavarsingh Death Rs. 50,000 364 of 1993 State v. Bhuwansingh Death Rs. 50,000 333 of 1994 State v. Premsingh Injury Rs. 95,000 197 of 1997 State v. Ramsingh Injury Rs. 14,000 201 of 1997 State v. Kamalsingh Injury Rs. 46,000 </FRM>

(2.) Mr. S.V. Dandwate appeared for the insurance company, Mr. V. Gangwal appeared for the claimants and Mr. V.R. Purohit appeared for tractor driver Bhura and owner Badrilal.

(3.) The brief facts are that on 3.3.1989 at about 12.30 p.m. or so one State Minister of the State of M.P. holding portfolio of Aadim Jati Kalyan Vibhag was to visit Dahi in Kukshi Tehsil of Dhar District. The programme of said Minister was circulated amongst concerned Government officers and one copy of that programme was received by Block Development Officer of Dahi. He sent a letter in that context to T.I. of Police Station, Dahi. As per the case of the claimants as well as witnesses, Badrilal and Bhura were present in village Dahi with tractor bearing No. CII 9587 and trolley No. CII 9588. As per evidence given by witnesses Badrilal and Bhura when the said tractor and trolley came at village Dahi, they were asked by police constable to go to Dahi Police Station as they were called there by the T.I. of the said police station. They went there accordingly and were asked to go to Primary School of Arada and were asked to pick up the pupils of the said Primary School and carry them through the said tractor and trolley to village Dahi where they were to attend the programme which was to be presided over by the said State Minister of the State of M.P. Both witnesses Badrilal and Bhura contacted one teacher named Manohar Goyal who happens to be the non- applicant for these matters. Manohar Goyal told them that the said pupils be taken to village Dahi for attending the programme which was to be presided over by the said State Minister of the State of M.P. In view of that, both Badrilal and Bhura took the pupils and allowed them to sit in the trolley and some portion of the tractor and to travel towards village Dahi. Unfortunately, the said tractor and trolley fell in a ditch causing an accident in which 8 pupils succumbed to death and 10 pupils suffered various types of injuries. The injured pupils filed the claims in M.A.C.T. through their guardians and the heirs of deceased pupils filed their claims in M.A.C.T.