SARBARI AND OTHERS Vs. MEHBOOB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FAO No.118 of 2012 This appeal has been filed by the 8 claimants-appellants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mewat (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.09.2011 on account of death of Sh.Shafi. Facts Not In Dispute

(2.) On 09.04.2010, the deceased-Shafi was going to Punhana from his village while sitting on a Tonga. At about 11:00 am, when they reached near Mohan Bhatta, then a tractor bearing No.HR-27-B-2317 came from behind being driven by respondent No.1 rashly and negligently and struck with a motorcycle which was coming behind the tonga and then struck with the tonga as a result of which Sh.Shafi deceased fell on the road and was crushed underneath the tractor and died. Sh.Shafi was aged 35 years and was a mason and was earning Rs.5,000.00 p.m.

(3.) The driver and the owner did not contest the claim petition despite being served. FIR No.111 dated 09.04.2010 Ex.P2 was registered at Police Station Punhana for the offence under Sections 279, 304-A Penal Code and charges were framed against the accused Mehboob son of Kale @ Sumen Khan on 07.06.2010. Ex.P1 was the correct photocopy of FIR, Ex.P2 was the correct copy of the report under Sec. 173 Crimial P.C., Ex.P3 is the copy of the post mortem report, Ex.P4 to Ex.6 are the copies of registration certificate, driving licence and Insurance cover note. The trial Court after hearing the parties and going through the documents came to the conclusion that the accident had taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1. The Insurance Company tendered documentary evidence Ex.R1 to Ex.R3 and examined Sh.Bhanu Partap Singh as RW1 who stated that driving licence had not been issued by their office. Hence the learned Tribunal held that driving licence of respondent No.1 was not a valid and he violated the terms of the policy of the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company was given a right of recovery after making payment to the claimants. Compensation Assessed By The Mact