NARAYAN KAHAR Vs. MUKESH KUMAR CHOURASIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As all the three appeals filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act arise out of the same accident and as challenge is made to three different awards passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur in three different claim cases, rejecting all the three claims on identical grounds, all the three appeals are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, documents and pleadings available in the record of M.A. No. 4733/2008 is being referred to. All the three appellants namely-Narayan Kahar, Dalchandra Kahar and Ramdayal Kahar, belong to the same family. They are related to each other and it is said that on 12.4.2007, at about 3.00 PM, they were travelling in an auto rickshaw bearing registration No. MP-49-R-0166. They were coming from village Bachai to Gadarwara in the auto rickshaw which was owned and driven by respondent No. 1 Mukesh Kumar Chourasiya and insured with respondent No. 2. It is said that when the auto rickshaw reached a place between Bohani and Gram Kudia, because of the rash and negligent manner in which respondent No. 1 was driving the auto rickshaw, it turned turtle when an unknown truck coming from the opposite side dashed against the vehicle in question. As a result of the accident, all the three claimants suffered injury.

(2.) As far as claimant Narayan Kahar, in M.A. No. 4733/2008, is concerned, he is said to have suffered grievous injuries on his leg, including multiple fracture. He was taken to the District Hospital, Gadarwara from where a report was lodged with regard to the accident in Police Station Gadarwara. The case was registered as Crime No. 174/07 and this appellant remained in hospital under treatment for a period from 12.4.2007 to 21.4.2007. After his discharge he filed a claim petition under section 166 claiming compensation of Rs. 13,14,000/-. His claim case was registered as Claim Case No. 18/2008 and by the impugned award dated 4.9.2008. Even though it is found that the because of the accident he has suffered injuries and was entitled to certain amount of compensation as assessed in the award, but the claim has been dismissed on the ground that the negligence of the driver and owner of the auto rickshaw i.e.. respondent No. 1 is proved and, therefore, the claim is unsustainable and as the owner, driver and insurance company of the truck was not a party, no award is passed. Challenging this award, this appeal has been filed by appellant Narayan Kahar.

(3.) Similarly, in M.A. No. 4735/2008, appellant Ramdayal Kahar had filed Claim Case No. 64/2008, which has been decided vide award dated 4.9.2008. Appellant also suffered grievous injury in his left leg and claimed compensation of Rs. 9,70,000/-. Even though the Tribunal found that because of the injuries suffered he was entitled for certain compensation, but holding that the negligence of the respondent No. 1 owner and driver of the auto rickshaw is not proved, the claim has been dismissed holding that the accident occurred because of the negligence of the truck driver and not the negligence of respondent No. 1.