NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. SAROJ SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the appellant / against the award dated 7.8.2008 passed by II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sidhi in MVC No.21/2008 whereby accepting the claim filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4 with regard to death of Devendra who was aged 36 years and husband of respondent No.1 and father of Respondent No. 2 to 4 (who were minor children), directed the appellant/Insurance Co. , Respondent No.5/driver and Respondent No.6/owner of the bus No.MP.53- A/0125 to pay Rs.6,47,000/- as compensation jointly and severally.

(2.) Facts giving rise to this appeal in brief are that on 27.4.2006 nearabout 11 a.m., deceased Devendra Shukla was travelling in Bus No.MP 53-A/0125 and near village Kham Police Station Majholi district Sidhi, driver/Respondent No.1 suddenly applied brakes. On account of this, the door of the bus was opened and deceased Devendra, who was sitting on a seat near the gate, fell down from the bus and came under a wheel of the bus due to which he died on the spot. Information of the incident was given at Police Station Majholi where Crime No. 74/06 under Section 304A of IPC was registered and the charge-sheet was filed against the respondent no.5. Thereafter on 5.9.2006 claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act was filed before the Claims Tribunal alleging that the aforesaid incident had taken place on account of rash and negligent driving by Respondent No.5. At the time of death, the deceased was 36 years old and was working as Conductor in another bus and was earning Rs.4000/- per month and in addition Rs.50/- per day as allowance. The claimants/ respondent No. 1 to 4 are dependent on the deceased and the deceased used to spend 2/3rd earning on them . Respondent No.1 being the wife deprived of consortium of the deceased and other respondents being minor children, they claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.7,11,000/-.

(3.) In the reply filed on behalf of the Respondents No. 5 and 6, it is submitted that the incident had taken place on account of negligent act of the deceased, as he had consumed liquor and was standing close to the door of the bus. Therefore, he fell down from the bus when the door was opened. At the time of the incident the vehicle was insured by the appellant Co. Therefore, if any liability of compensation is fastened, the appellant is liable to pay the same.