BALWINDER KAUR Vs. GURVINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (Tribunal for short) awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/ - to the appellants in view of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It was the appellants who came up in appeal for enhancement.

(2.) THE claim was laid by the appellants under Section 166 of the Act and they also tried to prove that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the tractor involved, by respondent No.1. The Tribunal, however, held that there was no rashness or negligence on the part of respondent No.1 because the deceased was hit by the tractor due to the circumstances beyond the control of the driver who had to swerve his vehicle towards one side of the road to save a cow which had suddenly come on the road and in that process he lost control on the vehicle and hit the deceased on the kacha portion of the road. It was observed by the Tribunal that nobody was actually responsible. According to the award, therefore, it was a pure and simple accident.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants argued that the evidence was not appreciated by the Tribunal though it was proved on record that the accident had occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the tractor by respondent No.1. She referred to para 9 of the award stating that it was incorporated therein that Gurdeep Singh, PW4 was an eye witness and had stated that the deceased was standing at bus stand Behlolpur when the truck being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, came to the wrong side of the road and hit the said person. Father of the deceased also stated that he had found his son under the wheels of the tractor near bus stand Behlolpur. It was further contended that despite evidence regarding rashness and negligence, the Tribunal granted the compensation for no fault liability, which was not legal.