GURMIT KAUR Vs. MOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this judgment, I intend to dispose of FAO No. 602 of 2011 titled as Gurmit Kaur and others vs. Mohan Singh and others and FAO No. 603 of 2011 titled as Karamjit Kaur and others vs. Mohan Singh and others, as both these appeals have been filed against the to awards which were the result of a single accident. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from FAO No. 602 of 2011.

(2.) The claimants filed the claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for grant of compensation, in respect of death of Surjit Singh in a motor vehicular accident. It was pleaded that applicant No.1Gurmit Kaur is the widow and applicant No.2 Baldeep Singh is the minor son of Surjit Singh. Applicants No. 3 and 4, namely, Balbir Singh and Mohinder Kaur are the parents of said Surjit Singh. Surjit Singh was aged 30 years and was working as cleaner on the truck. He was earning Rs.3,300/- per month. On 25.11.2007, Surjit Singh and Rajwinder Singh were unloading the electric poles loaded on Trolla No. PB-23-E-9095 and sustained serious injuries as the rope by which the electric poles were tied broke down. The electric poles suddenly fell down on them. In this accident both Surjit Singh and Rajwinder Singh died on the spot. FIR No. 104 dated 25.11.2007 was recorded at P.S. Andal, West Bengal. Notice was given to the respondents. Respondent No.1 filed reply taking preliminary objections that the claim petition is not maintainable in the present form. The applicants could not file the claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. On merits, the facts were denied for want of knowledge. Ownership of respondent No.2 was admitted.

(3.) Respondent No.2 filed separate written statement taking the objection of maintainability. It is pleaded that the claimants can seek compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act.