ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. JAMMA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against an award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhar in Claim Case No. 50 of 1997, dated 24.12.1997.

(2.) Claimants are the wife, children and mother of deceased Umraosingh who was 32 years old at the time of accident which took place on 10.6.1994 when he was hit by his tractor near a land where it was being taken by the driver who had been employed by Apa, s/o Bhuwan. Claim of Rs. 22,88,500 (rupees twenty-two lakh eighty-eight thousand and five hundred) has been raised for the death of deceased who according to the claimants was earning yearly income of Rs. 1,00,000 (rupees one lakh). This vehicle was insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., 569/3, M.G. Road, Indore (MP). The allegation is that it was being driven rashly and negligently resulting in serious injuries on the person of the deceased, who could not survive despite being taken to the hospital. Due to his death the claimants have been rendered to suffer immensely, domestically and financially. Owner and driver of the vehicle did not appear to answer the claim, therefore, proceeded ex parte. Appellant stated that the accident took place at a private place and not in public place, therefore, the Motor Vehicles Act is not applicable. Further, deceased was himself owner of the vehicle, therefore, not entitled to claim compensation. Above all, driver did not possess valid driving licence to drive the vehicle therefore, liability for payment of compensation cannot be rested on the appellant. The Claims Tribunal has come to the conclusion that on 10.6.1994 deceased was going from his house to the field slowly and on the left side but the tractor driven rashly and negligently hit him causing serious injuries resulting in death on 16.6.94. The Claims Tribunal held that claim petition was maintainable and accident had taken place at public place and compensation of Rs. 2,72,000 (rupees two lakh and seventy-two thousand) has been awarded carrying interest at the rate of 12 per cent from the date of application. Appellant is not satisfied with the award therefore, this appeal. Similarly, the claimants have filed cross-objection seeking enhancement of the compensation.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties and record perused.