ROSY JOSHI Vs. JOGINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimants are in appeal aggrieved against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), in respect of the claim application filed by the appellants arising out of motor vehicular accident.

(2.) On 10.7.1993, Surinder Kumar Joshi deceased was travelling on Maruti van No. CHB 7279 from Chandigarh to Barnala. As per the case set up by claimants, the vehicle was being driven by Joginder Singh, respondent No. 1, at a high speed on a rainy day. Suddenly, the driver applied the brakes on account of which the vehicle slipped and fell into a ditch on the roadside and collided with a tree. Such accident resulted in injuries to Surinder Kumar Joshi. He succumbed to injuries later on. The claimant alleged that the accident has been caused by rash and negligent driving of Maruti van by/Joginder Singh. Deceased was 46 years of age at the time of accident and was employed as General Manager (Sales) in Paper Division of Varinder Agro Chemical Ltd. at a salary of Rs. 17,000 per month. The legal representatives of the deceased Surinder Kumar Joshi sought compensation by filing a claim petition before the Tribunal.

(3.) Joginder Singh, respondent No. 1, admitted that Surinder Kumar Joshi was travelling in the van but he denied that the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving by him. Bharat Singh, the owner of van also filed a written statement on the similar lines. The insurance company contested the claim petition, inter alia, on the ground that in the claim application filed by Bharat Singh, the driver of the vehicle was Ranbir Singh, son of Bharat Singh and that it is nowhere alleged that Joginder Singh, son of Bal Krishan was driving the said Maruti van at the time of accident. It also pleaded that the owner in connivance with the claimants was playing fraud. The driver of the van was not having a valid driving licence and that the claimants have filed the claim application in connivance with respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to extract easy money from the insurance company. It also denied that the deceased was travelling in the aforesaid Maruti van or that the said van met with an accident or that Surinder Kumar Joshi sustained any injury in the alleged accident. It also stated that Maruti van at the time of alleged accident was used as a taxi which was against the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.