PRAYAGDATTA Vs. MAHENDRASINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 14. 10. 1988 of Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, passed in Claim Case No. 76 of 1987, whereby claimants-appellants' petition for compensation has been dismissed.

(2.) THIS is not in dispute that motor bus No. MPW 9204 was owned by respondent No. 2 and was being driven by the respondent No. 1, at the time of accident, i. e. , 14. 7. 1987. The respondent No. 1 was in the employment of respondent No. 2. The original respondent No. 3, Surendrasingh, who died during the pendency of the claim petition before the Tribunal, was the driver and owner of motor cycle No. MPN 6711. This is also not in dispute that claimant-appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are parents of deceased Chandra Shekhar Vyas and Nos. 3, 4 and 5 are his brothers. It is also not in dispute that this Chandra Shekhar Vyas was a political worker and was a Member of Legislative Assembly at the relevant period.

(3.) THE claimants-appellants' contention, in brief, is that deceased Chandra Shekhar Vyas was sitting as a pillion rider on the motor cycle. The same was being driven by Surendrasingh cautiously and in slow speed. A young boy tried to cross the road all of a sudden on a bicycle. Surendrasingh, therefore, swerved the motor cycle towards right. Meanwhile, the bus driven by respondent No. 1 came with a high speed and dashed against the motor cycle. Chandra Shekhar was thrown, sustained grievous injuries and was admitted in M. Y. Hospital for treatment, but died on 3. 8. 1987. Deceased Chandra Shekhar Vyas was unmarried. The appellants, i. e. , claimant Nos. 1 and 2 (parents of Chandra Shekhar) and his brother Sharad Vyas, claimant No. 5, were wholly depending on him. It was further pleaded that deceased Vyas was an M. L. A. , Member of Senate of the Indore University and was Director of Citizen Urban Co-operative Bank. He also used to support the work of Heera Market and was getting a salary of Rs. 600/- p. m. for that work. The income of Vyas was nearly Rs. 1,500/- p. m. As the bread-earner of the family has expired, the claimants are facing hardship. A total compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh) was, therefore, demanded.