RAHUL Vs. SATBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants being aggrieved of the dismissal of their petition under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') vide award dated 19.08.2008 passed by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Karnal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') have filed the present appeal challenging the said award.

(2.) The appellants alongwith respondent No.1 Satbir Singh had earlier filed separate petitions under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation on account of the death of Mahavir (the present appellants claim to be the LRs of Mahavir) and injuries caused to Satbir Singh on account of an accident which was alleged to have been caused on 17.12.2002 by the rash and negligent driving of a bus bearing registration No.HR-45-6171. The said bus was averred to have overtaken the motorcycle and applied the brakes abruptly due to which there was a collision of the bus with the motorcycle. Mahavir and Satbir Singh both are stated to have fallen down and received serious injuries and lateron, Mahavir succumbed to the injuries. The present appellants in the earlier petition under Section 166 of the Act had claimed a compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/- on account of the death of Mahavir in the said accident. The deceased Mahavir was alleged to be 35 years old and earning Rs. 5,000/- per month.

(3.) The second claim petition had been filed by Satbir Singh for a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by him in the said accident. Both the said claim petitions were dismissed vide award dated 10.12.2005 passed by the Tribunal on the ground that the petitioners therein had failed to prove that the death of Mahavir and the injuries to Satbir had been caused in an accident, which had allegedly occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of Bus No.HR45-6171 by one Nishan Singh, respondent therein. It was specifically held that in the FIR and in the earliest version, it had been alleged by them that the accident was caused by a car driven by some unnamed driver and the version had been changed subsequently. The said award dated 10.09.2009 which is on record has not been challenged either by the appellants or by Satbir Singh and has admittedly attained finality.