RAJU Vs. SUKHWINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of an order dated 3.6.1996 pased by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal (for short the "Tribunal") vide which the claim petition flied by the claimants was dismissed.

(2.) THE brief leading to the filing of the claim before the Tribunal were that on 14th of August, 1993 at about 9.30 p.m. Giana Ram - a rickshaw puller was coming from Indri to Ladwa on his rickshaw. A truck bearing registration No. HNE 2180 alleged to be driven by Sukhwinder Singh, respondent No. 1, in rash and negligent manner, came from behind and hit the rickshaw near Bus Stand of Village Andhgarh. Due to the impact of the accident, Giana Ram fell down on the road and the truck ran over him, as a result of which he died on the spot. The rickshaw was also badly damaged. DDR No. 28 dated 15.8.1993 was lodged at Police Station, Indri, after two days. It was the case of the claimants that after about two days Sat Pal and Raj Kumar told the brother of the deceased that at the time of the accident they were coming on their cycles from Indri. They noticed truck No. HNE 2180 being driven by respondent No. 1 which came from the side of Indri, and had hit against the rickshaw from the back side. On these allegations the compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 lakhs was claimed. The claim was contested by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. owner and driver of the offending truck on the ground that the claim petition was not maintainable and claimants had no locus standi to file the same. It was also the case of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that no accident had taken place with the truck in question and the object of the claim petition was to extract money from them. The allegations on merits were also denied. The case set up by respondent No. 1 was that on 13th and 14th of August, 1993 the truck in question remained in truck union at Yamuna Nagar and was at call list No. 42 and 32 respectively. The respondent No. 3 i.e. insurance company filed a separate written statement by raising a preliminary objection that the driver of the truck was not holding a valid driving licence and also the claim petition was bad for mis- joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :-

(3.) THE learned Tribunal decided issue No. 1 against the claimants by holding as under :-