BADDA ALIAS BARIK RAO Vs. KANTI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall govern aforesaid both the appeals arising out of the joint award and same accident.

(2.) The appellants tempo driver and owner respectively filed aforesaid appeals being aggrieved by the award dated 8.5.2003 passed by Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC) Betul in claim case No.28/02 and 31/02 which have been passed jointly with other claim cases bearing No.29/02, 30/02 33/02 and 1/2003 arising out of the same accident whereby the claim of the respondent No.l Kantibai (M. A. No. 1735/03) was awarded for the sum of Rs.25,000/- in claim case No.28/02 while the claim of respondent No.l to 3 (M.A.No.1738/03) has been awarded for the sum of Rs.1,87,000/- in claim case No.31/02. They have also been awarded the interest on the aforesaid amount @ 4.5% p.a. from the date of filing their respective claim petitions. As per further findings the cause of the alleged accident was found to be the composite negligence of tempo and alleged offending truck drivers. In pursuance of it 50% liability to indemnify the awarded sum has been saddled against the appellants while remaining liability has been saddled against the driver, owner and Insurance Company of offending truck. M.A. No. 1735/03 is preferred against the award passed in M. C. C. No.28/02 while M.A. No.1738/03 is filed against the award passed in M.C.C. No.31/02.

(3.) The facts giving rise to these appeals are that on 28.6.2001 at about 11.30 a.m. the respondent No.1 of M.A.No.1735/03 while the predecessor of respondent No.l to 3 of M.A. No.1738/03 namely Bhaiyalal along with some other persons by boarding the tempo of appellant No.2 driven by appellant No.l were going from Betul Bazar to Betul, on the way the truck bearing registration No.M.H.31- 9672 by towing another truck bearing registration No.MH-31-7116 came from the opposite side in rash and negligent manner driven by respondent No.3 and after passing the aforesaid tempo by front truck the truck which was towed came out from its side and collided with the tempo. Resultantly, respondent No.1 of M. A. No.1735/03 sustained injuries while the Bhaiya Lal the predecessor of respondent No.1 to 3 of M.A. No.1738/03 sustained the injuries and succumbed to it. The injured and dead body of Bhaiya lal were taken to hospital where MIC report and post mortem report were prepared. The aforesaid both the trucks were registered in the name of respondent No.4 namely S.S. Amin while same were insured with respondent No.6, National Insurance Company Pvt.Ltd. The front truck, towing the other truck, was driven by respondent Deodas. On receiving the information, FIR was registered against the offending truck and its driver on the same day at P.S.Betul as Crime No.19/01. As per further averments of their respective claim petitions the respondent No.1 of M.A. No.1735/03, Kanti bai W/o Arun Tidgam the claimant sustained the injuries on her head, chest and buttock for which she took the surgical and orthopedic treatment in the hospital. On taking x-ray the fracture of pelvic bone was also revealed. She took bed rest for one and half month under the medical advice. With these averments she preferred her claim for the sum of Rs.5,50,000/- while respondent No.1 to 3 of M.A. No.1738/ 03 by stating that the age of their predecessor was 50 years on the date of his vehicular death and being shoe maker he was running the business of shoes and sandals from which he was earning Rs.4,500/- p.m. and respondent No.1 to 3 were dependent on him. Due to his untimely death they have been deprived from their dependency and also sustained mental agony of it. His wife Maina also deprived from the company of her husband. With these averments they filed their claim for the sum of Rs.13,70,000/-. Besides this in both the claims the interest @ 18% p.a. on the awarded sum are also prayed.