NEW INDIA ASSURANCE AND CO LTD Vs. BHAGWANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TRUCK No. HRC-7273 being driven by Niranjan Singh hit the parked bus from behind killing Kanahya Lal another Bus driver who was repairing his bus on November 6, 1978, in the area of village Serai Khawaja on the Palwal-Delhi Road. His widow Bhagwanti filed a petition under Section 110- A of the Motor Vehicles Act for the grant of compensation. It was found as a fact by the Motor Accident claims Tribunal which finding has been affirmed by the learned Single Judge that Kanahya Lal died on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck driver of the aforementioned truck. The claimants were granted a sum of Rs. 6750/- by the Tribunal. On appeal, the learned Single Judge of this Court enhanced the compensation amount to Rs. 80,000/by recording a finding that in view of the size of the family which consisted of a widow and five sons between the age of 5 to 17 years, the deceased must be contributing a sum of Rs. 400/- per month out of his salary which was adjudged to be between Rs. 450/- to Rs. 500/- per month. The learned Single Judge, in other words, determined the annual dependency of the claimants at the rate of Rs. 4800/ -. After applying the normal multiplier of 16 because the age of the deceased was 39 years, the learned Single Judge determined the amount of compensation at Rs. 76,800/- which was rounded off to Rs. 80,000/ -.

(2.) THE only argument advanced before the learned Single Judge by the Insurance Company was that the claimants were not entitled to claim any compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act as they claimed compensation under the workmen's compensation Act. The argument did not find favour with the learned Single Judge because no such plea was raised in the written statement Bhagwanti denied in her statement that she ever filed any application for compensation under the workmen's compensation Act and in view thereof it was rightly held that Exh. R-3 drafted by Bhagwanti's brother would not make any difference to the case of the claimants particularly when she stated that the application Ex R-3 was not read over to her and her signatures were only obtained upon the same. Bhagwanti has been found to be illiterate woman and, therefore, any admission made by her that she had received Rs. 3000/- from the commissioner under the workmen's compensation Act cannot be said to be such a circumstance which would debar her from claiming compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. Moreover, we are of the firm view that no amount of evidence can be looked into a plea which is not taken in the written statement.