AJAIB KAUR Vs. SURINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been preferred by the appellant -claimants feeling dissatisfied against the award dated May 12, 1997 whereby claim petition preferred by them under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity "the Act") claiming compensation on account of death of Teja Singh was dismissed.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts leading to the filing the claim petition are that on January 12, 1994 at about 3:00 p.m. Teja Singh was travelling in Tata Mobile No.PB -10 -E -9975 which was being driven by Rajinder Singh son of Mohinder Singh and when they reached near Village Ghharuan, Tehsil Kharar, a bus bearing No.CH -01 -G -5318 belonging to CTU driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner dashed into the Tata Mobile. As a result of which, Teja Singh sustained multiple injuries, consequently, breathed his last.

(3.) UPON notice, the claim petition was resisted by the respondents. Respondent No.1 filed written statement raising preliminary objections inter alia on the grounds that the petition is not maintainable against him and the petition is bad for misjoinder of necessary parties i.e. owner, driver and insurance company of the Tata Mobile. On merits, it has been alleged that the vehicle i.e. Tata Mobile was being driven rashly and negligently and in a zigzag manner by its driver. He was under the influence of liquor at that time and struck the vehicle against the bus which was parked on the Kacha Burm of the road belonging to respondent No.2. The passengers were alighting from the bus at that time. Respondent No.2 filed separate written statement submitting that the petition is barred by time and is bad for non joining of Union of India which is a necessary party. However, he has endorsed the other pleas as taken by respondent No.1. Both the respondents prayed for dismissal of the petition. On going through the pleadings of parties, following issues were framed: