STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RANJANA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE this judgment, I intend to dispose of appeal directed by State of Haryana against the Award dated 15.03.2000 passed by Shri B.S.Rawat, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar vide which claim petition filed under Section 163 -A of Motor Vehicles Act ( in short - the Act) was accepted and a sum of Rs.6,63,000/ - was allowed. In the appeal cross -objections were also directed by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation amount.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the case of the claimants is that on 8.4.1998 at Barwala town Rohtash suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident and he succumbed to injuries in Hospital on 7.6.1998. It is alleged that Rohtash was going towards Uklana in car bearing registration No. HRY - 3321 being driven by him at a moderate speed and on the correct side of the road. When the car being driven by Rohtash approached Barwala town Bus bearing registration No.HR -20PA/0314 of Haryana Roadways which was being driven by Jagminder Singh respondent No.1 at a very high speed and in a rash and negligent manner came from the opposite direction and hit against the car No. HRY/3321 as a result of which Rohtash suffered grievous and multiple injuries. Rohtash remained admitted in Chawla Nursing Home Hisar for treatment upto 7.6.1998 when he succumbed to his injuries. Smt. Ranjna Devi widow and Funia minor son of Rohtash claimed to be dependent upon Rohtash. They have sought compensation of rupees 10lacs from the driver and owner of the bus involved in the accident.

(3.) ON notice, respondent No.1 appeared and filed written statement and controverted the allegations made by the petitioner attributing the accident resulting in injuries to Rohtash and subsequently his death due to his rash and negligent driving of the bus. It is alleged that he drove the vehicle at a moderate speed from Chandigarh to Hisar on 8.4.1998 and when the bus approached Dhani Prem Nagar situated at a distance of three kilometers from Barwala, a Maruti Car came from the opposite direction. The car was being driven at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and the car hit the bus. The driver of the car and one more person who was occupying seat in the car suffered injuries. The car was being driven in a rash and negligent manner because it was carrying poppy straw and the driver was also driving the car at a high speed under the effect of poppy straw consumed by him. Answering respondent has further stated that he went to the police station and informed the police about the accident. Denying other averments, answering respondent prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.