NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. DARSHANI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS per office report, notice issued to respondent No.2 has been received back unserved with the report that his address is incomplete. Respondents No.3 and 4 are proforma respondents.

(2.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned award dated 09.05.2000 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kaithal, notice to respondent No.2 Ashok Kumar Vijay Kumar in the facts and circumstances of the case would not be necessary.

(3.) SMT . Darshani Devi (respondent No.1) and Shamsher Singh (since dead) (proforma respondent No.3) filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) claiming compensation for the death of their son namely Dayala, aged 17 -18 years in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 14.02.1994. Shamsher Singh (proforma respondent No.3) father of Dayala died during the pendency of the claim petition. The claim petition survived only in respect of Darshani Devi (respondent No.1).