HAJARILAL Vs. LAKHANPRATAP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall govern the disposal of all the three connected appeals, out of which Misc. Appeal No. 196 of 1998 has been filed against dismissal of the claim petition and Misc. Appeal No. 263 of 1998 has been filed for enhancement of compensation by the claimants and Misc. Appeal No. 304 of 1998 has been filed by the owners of the vehicle.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 26.6.1995 a truck bearing registration No. MP 07-A 7032 owned by Gurudeep Singh, respondent No. 2, was being driven by Lakhanpratap Singh, respondent No. 1. The said truck was insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 3, (hereinafter referred to as 'the insurance company'). The case of the claimants was that deceased Mendabai and Doltibai along with Bhagti, Luma, Jenwati and Gopi were sitting near cement factory of Bhangarh and they were waiting for the bus to go to the place of worship. At the same time the aforesaid truck which was driven rashly and negligently came and turned turtle over the persons those who were sitting at that place. As a result of the accident, deceased Mendabai died on spot and the deceased Doltibai died on the way when she was being taken to hospital. First information report of the incident was lodged by one Ramdayal, AW 1. The husband and children of the deceased filed application for compensation. Claims Tribunal dismissed the Claim Case No. 148 of 1995, which was filed by legal heirs of deceased Doltibai on the ground that the claimants have failed to prove the death of the deceased in the said accident, as they have not filed any post-mortem report and has not proved the death of deceased in the accident against which legal heirs of deceased Doltibai has filed Misc. Appeal No. 196 of 1998 challenging the dismissal of the claim petition. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 50,000 in Claim Case No. 168 of 1995, which was filed by the legal heirs of the deceased Mendabai. But the Tribunal exonerated the insurance company from its liability on the ground that the deceased were travelling in the truck which is a goods vehicle, therefore, the insurance company is not liable for the payment of compensation against which legal heirs of deceased Mendabai has filed Misc. Appeal No. 268 of 1998 for enhancement of compensation and owner Gurudeep Singh has also filed Misc. Appeal No. 304 of 1998 challenging the exoneration of insurance company from its liability.

(3.) Mr. N.D. Singhal, learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly exonerated the insurance company and has wrongly dismissed the Claim Case No. 148 of 1995. He has further submitted that the copy of the post-mortem report was produced on record and the same being public document should have been considered as no evidence in rebuttal of the same is available on record. He has further pointed out that the owner of the vehicle has admitted the accident. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation to the claimants. In Misc. Appeal No. 263 of 1998 he submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly exonerated the insurance company and has not properly assessed the evidence and has not awarded the proper compensation and prayed for enhancement of compensation.