ROSHNI DEVI Vs. BALDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation assessed at Rs. 1,18,000/ - as payable, having subjected the assessment to a reduction on account of finding of contributory negligence. The accident had taken place on 28.04.1996 and the claimants were widow and 3 sons. The deceased was said to be engaged in agricultural and dairy farming. His income was assessed at Rs. 2,000/ - for determining the compensation.

(2.) IT was a case of a collision between three -wheeler and a bus. The deceased was a passenger in a three -wheeler. It was in evidence that there were about 12/13 passengers in the three -wheeler. The accident was said to have taken place when the three -wheeler was coming from the side road and got into the main GT Road without waiting for the traffic that was proceeding in the GT road. On account of the collision, three -wheeler turned turtle, struck against a car and another truck coming from the side of Karnal. A FIR had been lodged on the basis of a report given by the driver of the three -wheeler. A statement recorded in the FIR was that the three -wheeler came from the link road and it was to cross the road and while so doing, the collision had taken place. Although he had given the statement on the basis of which, FIR had been lodged, the driver of the three -wheeler did not examine himself and the Tribunal, therefore, observed that the driver of the three -wheeler must also be held as responsible. The Tribunal omitted to see that in a case of collision between two vehicles where the claimant or the deceased had himself not contributed to the accident on his part, the issue of contributory negligence did not arise. It could be only taken as composite negligence of the drivers of both the vehicles and no part of the amount could have been subjected to any deduction. The entire amount of compensation, as assessed, must have been directed to be paid by anyone of the tort -feasors giving a liberty to seek for contribution against the joint tort -feasors. I, therefore, set aside the finding regarding contributory negligence as legally untenable.

(3.) I shall rework the compensation and tabulate the various heads of claims as under: -