ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. RACHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORIENTAL Insurance Company through its Manager has filed the present appeal and it has been directed against the award dated 24.9.1997 passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur, who allowed the claim petition filed by Smt Rachna, widow of Suresh Kumar, Miss Cannu Sharma, minor daughter of Suresh Kumar, Pankaj minor son of Suresh Kumar, Krishan Chand father of Suresh Kumar and Satya Rani mother of Suresh Kumar and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,69,500/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation and it was ordered by the Tribunal that claimant No. 1 will get Rs. 1,10,000/-, claimants 2 and 3 will get Rs. 1,10,000/- each and claimants 4 and 5 will get Rs. 39,500/- in equal shares. Also it was observed that the amount falling to the share of the minors shall be deposited in the bank which shall be paid to them on attaining their majority. Also it was observed that claimant No. 1 shall be entitled to receive interest from time to time on the amount which was given to her minor children.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that 5 claimants mentioned above filed claim petition against Sukhjit Singh, Suresh Kumar and Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Hoshiarpur and claimed Rs. 6 lacs by way of compensation on account of the death of Suresh Kumar son of Kishan Chand who was the husband of Rachna. It is alleged by the claimants that on 4.11.1995, a Maruti Van No. DL-2CC-6589 belonging to Sham Lal was being driven by Suresh Kumar while Tarsem Lal was sitting in the said van by the driver's side on the front seat. The other occupants of the van were Rajiv, Rimpi and Monica, who were on the back seat. At about 7-15 pm, when they reached in the area of petrol pump, Nasrala, a Matador No. GJ IV-2809 being driven by respondent No. 2 another Suresh Kumar came from behind very rashly and negligently and struck the side of Matador with the Maruti van. Due to the accident, the occupants of the van received injuries. Suresh Kumar succumbed to his injuries in the hospital. A case was registered against the driver vide FIR No. 263 dated 5.11.1995. The accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of Matador by its driver respondent No. 2. Claimants were dependents on the income of the deceased who was driver by profession and was earning Rs. 3000/- per month. Respondent No. 1 was the owner of Matador which was insured with respondent No. 3. Thus, all the respondents are liable jointly and severally to pay compensation.

(3.) INSURANCE Company-respondent No. 3 also contested the claim petition and it was pleaded by it that accident did not take place with the Matador and it was also pleaded in the alternative that if it is proved on record that the accident had taken place, it did not take place on account of the negligence of respondent No. 2-Suresh Kumar.