VINOD KUMAR Vs. NAYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals are by the owner-cum-driver of the mini truck No. M.P.-09/KB/3248 which met with an accident on 1.12.1999 injuring Nayansingh (R-1) in M.A. No. 1191/2002 and Sanjay Yadav (R-l) in M.A. No. 1195/2002 with certain others. Accident Claims Tribunal, Barwani by a common order dated 22.4.2002 awarded Rs. 26,500/- with interest 10% per annum to Sanjay Yadav and Rs. 44,207/- with interest 9% per annum to Nayan Singh while exonerating the New India Assurance Company Limited (the Insurance Company). As per claim both claimants had been travelling in the mini truck as owners of goods. Narayansingh had Jawar and fertilizer while Sanjay Yadav had bags of spices with him. According to both of them due to rash and negligent driving by Poonamchand (A-2) the vehicle had overturned injuring both of them and other passengers going towards village Keli market. Both Nayan Singh (R-1 ) and Sanjay Yadav (R-2) had claimed that they had suffered grievous injuries.

(2.) THE Tribunal had held that the truck had overturned due to rash and negligent driving by Poonamchand (A-1). However, while holding that both Nayan Singh (R-1) and Sanjay Yadav (R-2) were injured in the accident it had found that they were not travelling in the capacity of owners of goods in the goods vehicle but it held that these two had been mere passengers paying fare with 30-40 other passengers.

(3.) CERTAINLY , the mini truck has been the goods vehicle meant for carrying goods and not carrying passenger. Nayan Singh (A.W. 1) had claimed that he had two bags for fertilizer and one bag of Juwar with him. However, he was not sure as to what had happened to these bags after the accident, no bills or vouchers for purchase of bags have been produced. There had been no evidence that he had taken away these bags after the accident. Sanjay (A.W. 2) had claimed that he had spices with him. He has not disclosed the weight of such spices and in what container the same were kept. He has claimed to be a spices vendor. Sitaram (A.W. 3) had supported him. As per F.I.R., Ex. P/l, 25-30 passengers were sitting in the mini truck. There has been no reference of goods being carried by them with. Nayan Singh (A.W. 1) had admitted that after seating of the passengers in the mini truck no space was left for keeping the goods or luggage in the same. Though the mini truck had been seized after the accident vide Ex. P/6 on 1.12.1999 itself by the police, yet there had been no reference of the goods found loaded in the truck in memorandum of seizure. None of the appellants had examined himself to support the case of Nayan Singh or Sanjay Yadav that they had been travelling in the mini truck as owners of the goods loaded in the same. The learned Tribunal did not believe Nayan Singh (A.W. 1) or Sanjay Yadav (A.W. 2) in their claim that they had been travelling with their goods in the mini truck. Such a finding of fact based on evidence on record cannot be said to be erroneous and thus the learned Tribunal below has not erred in exonerating the Insurance Company from the liability.