NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. SANATAN NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals by the Insurer are directed against a composite award passed under S.110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short, 'the Act') by the Tribunal in three claims cases arising out of the same accident.

(2.) The case of the claimants, in brief, is that a transport truck bearing registration No. ORU 1631 belonged to respondent Harbhajan Singh, who was insured with the insurer-appellant, although his wife respondent Jasbir Kaur was named as the owner in the registration book. On 10-8-1980 the truck loaded with iron ore was proceeding towards Paradip on Daitari-Paradip Express Highway. At Phuljhar crossing while the truck was running with great speed and while giving passage to another running vehicle, it turned to the left side of the highway and as the driver would not control the vehicle, it met with an accident. As a result, the truck turned on its side and the entire iron ore fell upon Kirtan Sahu and Kulamani Nayak, two petty garment dealers, who were sitting by the side of the road waiting for a bus to carry them to their village. They met with instantaneous death. The helper of the truck Ramachandra Sahu who was inside the driver's cabin was crushed underneath the truck near its door. The driver, it seems, escaped unhurt and remained untraced. The claimants in the three cases are the widow and the minor children of Kirtan Sahu, the father and sister of Kulamani Nayak and the father and sister of Ramachandra Sahu. According to the claimants, the deceased persons were the earning members of the family and after their death they were deprived of their source of livelihood. The heirs of deceased Kirtan Sahu and Kulamani Naik claimed compensation of Rs. 25,000/- respectively and the heirs of deceased Ramachandra Sahu claimed compensation of Rs. 20,000/-.

(3.) Respondent Jasbir Kaur in her written statement averred that she was not the owner of the truck on the alleged date of accident. She became the owner of the truck subsequently, but it was not involved in any accident causing the death of the deceased persons. Therefore, she was not liable to pay compensation claimed by their heirs. The claim petitions were also barred by limitation.