CHAMPA DEVI Vs. RAM SARUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dismissing the claim petition filed by the widow, daughters (out of which two are minors) and minor son of Mohinder Singh, who died in the accident.

(2.) BRIEFLY, the facts are that on May 25, 1988, at about 1. 30 p. m. , the deceased, Dr. Mohinder Singh, was driving his scooter No. DEN-6106, while Ram Chander Trivedi, his teacher colleague, was sitting on the pillion. Both were coming from Pehowa to Kurukshetra and when they were about 1/2 kilometre behind Jyotisar towards Pehowa side, tractor bearing No. HNQ-3621 driven by Ram Dhari alias Pali Ram and owned by one Ram Samp, came from Kurukshetra side and hit against the scooter, due to which Dr. Mohinder Singh and Ram Chander Trivedi received multiple injuries and fell unconscious. From there, they were removed to the hospital. Mohinder Singh succumbed to his injuries. Ram Chander Trivedi, on regaining consciousness, lodged the first information report with the police. In the said first information report he could neither give the number of the tractor nor the name of the person who was driving the tractor. The claim petition, on contest by the owner and the insurance company, was dismissed on the ground that the claimants failed to establish the identity of the driver and also whether tractor No. HNQ-3621 was involved in the accident or not. The claimants have now filed the present first appeal in this court.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellants has taken me through the statements of the witnesses as well as documents brought on the record. From the statement of P. W.-2, Mai Chand, mechanic, and also P. W.-5, Bipati Ram, I find that the identity of the tractor involved in the accident is established. P. W.-2, Mai Chand, in his statement, has stated that on May 25, 1988, at about 1. 30 p. m. when he was coming from Pehowa to Kurukshetra, he noticed a tractor No. HNQ-3621 coming in a zia-zag manner and hitting against a scooter. Instead of stopping his tractor at the spot, the driver of the tractor made good his escape along with his tractor. However, he could not recognize Pali Ram when he was asked to recognize him in court. Otherwise also, from his statement, the identity of the tractor is established though he could not say with certainty as to whether Pali Ram was driving the tractor at that time. Similarly, P. W.-5, Bipati Ram, who is a matriculate and is a labourer, has stated that when he was coming from village Bhor Saidan at about 1. 30 p. m. , he saw one tractor bearing No. HNQ-3621 coming from Kurukshetra side. The tractor was being driven rashly and in a zig-zag manner and it hit the scooterist who was coming on his correct side of the road. Both these witnesses were categoric that the tractor was being driven rashly and negligently and after striking the scooter, the driver of the tractor sped away with the tractor. P. W.-5, Bipati Ram, in his statement, has further stated that he can recognize the person who was driving the tractor at the time of accident. When P. W.-2, Mai Chand, was being examined, Pali Ram was produced in court for his identification, but on the day when P. W.-5, Bipati Ram, was being examined, Pali Ram was not produced for identification for the reasons best known to the respondents. As a matter of fact, P. W.-5, Bipati Ram, denied the suggestion of the respondents that Pali Ram never drove the tractor. P. W.-5, Bipati Ram, was cross-examined at length, but he stood the test of cross-examination. His statement inspires confidence. Thus, from the evidence of P. W.-5, Bipati Ram, the claimants have been able to establish conclusively that tractor No. HNQ-3621 was involved in the accident and was being driven by Pali Ram and because of his negligence, the accident took place as a result of which Mohinder Singh died and Ram Chander Trivedi, who was sitting on the pillion of the scooter, suffered multiple injuries.