LAWS(P&H)-2000-12-78

GURPAL SINGH Vs. AVTAR SINGH

Decided On December 12, 2000
GURPAL SINGH Appellant
V/S
AVTAR SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal preferred by Gurpal Singh, hereinafter described as "the appellant" directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar, dated 13.12.1985. By virtue of the impugned award, the learned Tribunal had dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that the appellant is about 38 years of age. He is an agriculturist by profession. As per his claim, on 6.4.1984 he was going to village Maiwal Arian, Tehsil Nakodar, on his tractor No. 8936 in order to meet his relations. He was driving the tractor at a moderate speed. When he reached near the Dera of Didar Singh in village Malsian, Tehsil Nakodar, Bus No. PJQ 5741 driven by Avtar Singh came at a high speed from Shahkot side. It struck against the tractor of the appellant as the result of which he received grievous injuries and suffered fracture of his right thigh and right arm. He was removed to Civil Hospital, Shahkot. He was given first aid and, therefore, removed to Bawa Hospital, Jalandhar. He remained admitted there for several days. On 25.3.1985, he was operated upon. A case was registered by the police on the basis of the statement of Karam Singh, father of the appellant. The appellant was under great mental agony and depression and was handicapped. He was unable to do his agricultural work. A compensation of Rs. 10 lacs was claimed. It has further been pleaded that because of the depression and the illness, he could not file the claim petition in time and accordingly it was prayed that the delay in filing of the petition may be condoned.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 3, the Oriental Insurance Company, filed its separate reply and urged that the income claimed by the appellant is excessive. It also denied the manner in which the accident took place (as alleged by the appellant). Liability to pay the compensation by the Insurance Company was denied. The plea raised was that the driver did not hold a valid driving licence. The vehicle did not have a fitness certificate.