LAWS(P&H)-1980-1-44

SHAM LAL Vs. SHMT. JANAK DULARI AND OTHERS

Decided On January 28, 1980
SHAM LAL Appellant
V/S
Shmt. Janak Dulari And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed by Sham Lal, appellant, against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ambala, (hereinafter called the Tribunal), dated July 3, 1972, whereby the claim petition under section 110 -A of the Motor Vehicles Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), was partly allowed. No appeal has been filed either by the claimants -respondents, the owner of the defaulting vehicle or the insurance company.

(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts are that on August 21, 1970, at about I P.M., Manohar Lal, (now deceased) was going on his motor cycle on the G.T Road, from Rajpura side. At the junction of G.T. Road and Balmiki Road, Ambala City, he took turn and was proceeding along Balmiki Road, A Truck No. HRK -1287 (hereinafter to be called the truck) driven by Sham Lal, appellant, came from the side of Ambala Cantt. and struck against the rear side of the motor cycle being driven by Manohar Lal. The truck was being driven at a high speed. Nor the horn was blown by the appellant. As a result of the impact, Manohar Lal, was thrown on the ground and he sustained serious injuries. The accident was witnessed by Kalyan Dass, A.W. 5; Bant Lal, A.W. 6 and Kundan Lal. A.W. 4, Manohar Lal was removed to the Civil Hospital, Ambala, in an unconscious condition in the said truck where he succumbed to his injuries. A report was sent to the S.H.O. Police Station, Ambala City, by the doctor. The claim petition was filed by Shmt. Janak Dulari, widow of the deceased, Shrimati Lajwant, mother of the deceased, on her behalf as well as on behalf of Sanjeev Kumar, aged 7 months, son of the deceased, under section 110 -A of the Act, against the driver of the truck, and the owners of the truck. The General Assurance Society was also impleaded as respondent in the capacity of an insurer for the truck. The claim petition was contested by Sham Lal, appellant, as well as the owner of the truck and the insurer. In view of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: - -

(3.) RELIEF .