RAJ KUMAR GOYAL Vs. PRYAG NARAIN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall govern the orders in all the seven appeals as they arise out of common award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. All the appeals are filed against the impugned award dated 31.1.2000 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Morena. All the appeals are filed for enhancement of compensation. Other findings recorded by Claims Tribunal are not under challenge. These appeals are confined to quantum of compensation.

(2.) Misc. Appeal No. 632 of 2000 has been filed by the parents of the deceased Chhaya and the other appeals were filed by the claimants-injured.

(3.) Claimants had submitted a claim that on 28.3.1994, Raj Kumar Goyal, Seema Jain, Rakesh alias Rajesh Jain, Darshanlal Jain, Rani Devi Jain, Gaurav Jain, Mohani Jain, Padam Chand Jain and others were returning from Sonagiri to Morena in jeep bearing registration No. MP 06-B 0024. The jeep was driven in a rash and negligent manner by the jeep driver which collided with the tractor-trolley bearing registration No. CPG 6404. The said tractor was parked towards the left side of the road. Accident occurred on 28.3.1994 at 11 in the night at A.B. Road near village Jaura. The jeep was driven in a rash and negligent manner by the driver of the jeep. In all two persons Rahul and Chhaya died and others received injuries. Claims Tribunal has referred to the pleadings of the parties, wherein it is clearly mentioned that jeep was driven in a rash and negligent manner and in spite of protest of the passengers the driver had not reduced the speed of the jeep and dashed against the tractor-trolley which was parked and stationed towards left side of the road. The Claims Tribunal has recorded a finding that accident occurred on account of negligence of drivers of both the vehicles and held that it is a case of composite negligence and directed that 60 per cent of the claim amount shall be paid by the jeep driver, its owner and insurance company and rest 40 per cent of the amount shall be paid by the driver of the tractor-trolley, its owner and the insurance company. As regards liability to pay the compensation on account of the composite negligence is concerned there is negligence on the part of drivers of both the vehicles. Therefore, drivers, owners and insurance company of both the vehicles are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. It could not be proved that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of tractor-trolley. As such owners of both the vehicles are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and I hold that Claims Tribunal has not committed any error in holding that this is a case of composite negligence.