THANDI RAM Vs. MANGU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, Thandi Ram and Smt. Champa Devi the parents of the deceased Krishan Singh, Smt. Krishna Devi widow of the deceased and two minor sons of the deceased named Manoj and Lachhman, filed an application giving rise to the filing of the present petition claiming compensation for the death of the deceased Krishan Singh. It has been averred in the petition that Krishan Singh was run over by a truck bearing No. HRH 6424 which was owned by Manga Ram, respondent No. 1 and driven by Kanwar Bhan, respondent No. 2. It was the case of the petitioners that the offending truck was got insured with the insurance company, respondent No. 3 by Ram Kumar, respondent No. 4 who was the registered owner of the offending truck on the date of the accident Krishan Singh, according to the claimants, was earning Rs. 500/- per month on date of the accident. A sum of Rs. 30,000/- was claimed as compensation by the petitioners from respondents. Respondents No. 1 and 2 denied in their written statement that truck No. HRH 6424 (hereinafter referred to as 'the offending truck), was involved in the accident. It was further their plea that the truck was got insured by Ram Kumar respondent No. 4 with respondent No. 3 and that he hold sold the same to respondent No. 1 who had become its owner. The right of the claimants to claim compensation was rejected by averring that the death of Krishan Singh was not caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending truck. Respondent No. 3 in its separate written statement pleaded that insurance policy in respect of the offending truck was issued in the name of Ram Kumar for the year from 8- 5-1978 to 7-5-1979, but since the truck was sold by Ram Kumar before date of accident the company was not liable. It was further pleaded by respondent No. 3 that the offending truck was not involved in the accident and that the claim against the Insurance company was barred. Respondent No. 4 was proceeded against ex parte as he has chosen not to appear despite service. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed :

(2.) ISSUE No. I was decided against the petition holding that Krishan Singh did not die as a result of rash and negligent driving of the offending truck and that it was not proved that it was the offending truck which was involved in the accident. Under issue No. 2 the petitioners were held to be legal representatives. Issue Nos. 3 and 4 were decided in favour of the claimants and against the respondents, whereas under issue No. 6 it was found that the truck was transferred in favour of Kanwar Bhan only on 11- 4-1979 and that at the time of accident the registered owner of the offending truck was Ram Kumar (some where his name has been mentioned as Ram Kanwar ). Under issue No. 5 it was held that the petitioners were entitled to an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- but since the finding of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal went against claimants under issue No. 1, they were found not entitled to the grant of any compensation what-soever.

(3.) THE petitioners feeling aggrieved against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, have come up in appeal before this Court.