SACHDEVA RICE MILLS Vs. RAJ ANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, we are disposing of Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 33 to 36 of 1987, Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 837 and 838 of 1986 along with Cross? objection No. 3 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 837 of 1986, Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 10 to 13 of 1987 along with Cross objection No. 9 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 10 of 1987 which are directed against judgment dated 25.8.1986 of the learned single Judge vide which he enhanced the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gurdaspur (for brevity, ?the Tribunal?). The Tribunal had awarded total compensation amounting to Rs. 1,93,000 along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum. The learned single Judge enhanced the compensation to Rs. 3,00,000 but maintained the rate of interest specified in the award of the Tribunal. For the sake of convenience, the appeals and cross?objections can be divided into the following three groups?

(2.) We may now notice the facts relevant to the decision of the appeals? In an accident which had occurred on 15.8.1981 involving bus No. PUG 3720 belonging to Punjab Roadways and truck No. PBN 778 at the crossing of Amrtisar?Gurdaspur Road near outskirts of Batala, Mohinder Partap Gupta, who was a passenger in the said bus, was killed on the spot. His widow Raj Anand, daughter Mamta Rani and son Jatinder Gupta filed petition for award of compensation. Vidya WatiGupta filed separate petition in her personal capacity as also guardian of Jatinder Gupta. The claimants had averred that the deceased had been killed due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicles involved in the accident. They gave out the age of late Mohinder Partap Gupta as 45 years and averred that while working as Sub?divisional Engineer in the Public Works Department, he was drawing salary at the rate of Rs. 2,100 per month.

(3.) The appellants and others contested the claim petitions and pleaded that they were not liable to pay compensation.