PRAMILA Vs. SARVAR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the award dated 6.2.1995 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mudwara in Claim Case No. 28 of 1988.

(2.) Claimants are widow of the deceased and his parents. On 19.7.1988, deceased (Anil Pandey) was going to his village Bichha from Katni by Luna. He was moving on the left side of the road but driver of bus No. UGH 930 came from opposite side driving the bus rashly and negligently and dashed against the deceased, causing injuries as a result of which he died at the site of accident after some time. Deceased was a young man of 22 years. He was a bidi contractor earning Rs. 900 per month. From agriculture he was earning about Rs. 40,000/Rs. 50,000 annually since his family possessed 66 acres of land. Compensation of Rs. 27,44,900 has been claimed. The owner and driver of the vehicle have stated that the bus was not being driven rashly and negligently and allegation to this effect was untrue and manufactured. Accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of Luna by the deceased. Claim for compensation is exaggerated. Deceased did not possess a valid driving licence at the time of accident, therefore, the liability for payment of compensation is not theirs and in case any liability is established, the same be made payable by the insurance company. Defence of the insurance company is that the deceased was driving the vehicle carelessly. His mental state was not normal. He did not possess driving licence and the accident took place due to his carelessness for which he himself is responsible. The deceased was dependent on the claimants. He did not have independent source of income. He was not earning Rs. 900 per month from bidi trade nor anything out of agriculture. Since he did not possess driving licence, insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.

(3.) After trial of the case, the Tribunal found that accident dated 19.7.1988 was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the bus No. UGH 930. Due to this accident, deceased, aged 22 years died. With respect to income of the deceased, it is found that he used to contribute to the family Rs. 750 per month. Damage to Luna has not been established. Ultimately, compensation of Rs. 1,40,000 has been awarded carrying interest thereon at the rate of 12 per cent per annum. It is not proved that deceased did not have driving licence. Claimants are not satisfied with this award, therefore, it has been challenged through this appeal.