NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of two FAO Nos. 311 and 312 of 2005 arising out of the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short the 'Tribunal') dated 29-5-2004 in two claim petitions, one filed by Meena and others to claim compensation on account of death of Shri Parmal Singh and another filed by her for compensation on account of injuries sustained by her. For facility of reference, facts have been taken from FAO No. 312 of 2005.

(2.) THE appellant, Insurance company by way of present appeals has challenged the award passed by Shri Balbir Singh, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh, dated 29-5-2004 vide which respondent Nos. 1 to 3 were granted a compensation to the tune of Rs. 16 lacs with future interest @ 9% P.A. on account of death of Shri Parmal Singh, husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The Tribunal has further awarded a sum of Rs. 35,000/- to Smt. Meena on account of injuries suffered by her in the accident. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 9-7-2000 deceased Parmal Singh alongwith his wife Smt. Meena (claimant), Nirmal Singh, brother of the deceased alongwith Des Raj and Usha Kumari were travelling in a Maruti Car bearing registration No. HR-07-1500 which was driven by the deceased Shri Parmal Singh. At about 7 AM when they reached near Sirhind bypass, Rajpura, a tanker truck No. UP-6801 which was going ahead of the Maruti Car, was being driven rashly and negligently by Shri Sunil Kumar, who applied sudden brakes and in spite of best efforts by the deceased to stop the vehicle, the same hit the tanker truck from behind. On account of the accident, Shri Parmal Singh sustained multiple and grievous injuries on his body whereas Smt. Meena suffered injuries on her head, face, teeth, jaw and other parts of the body. The teeth of Smt. Meena were broken and jaw was dislocated. The other persons travelling in the said car also sustained injuries. Shri Parmal Singh died on account of injuries suffered by him in the accident, whereas Smt. Meena got treatment at Kurukshetra and Chandigarh and sustained permanent disability in her right hand and her six teeth were also broken. With regard to the said accident, a case was also registered under Sections 279, 337, 304-A and 427 I.P.C. on 10-4-2000 vide FIR No. 08, P.S. City Rajpura against Sunil Kumar Divedi, respondent driver. Two claim petitions were filed, one by claimant Smt. Meena alongwith her minor son Rohit and minor daughter Richa seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 30 lacs with costs and future interest on account of death of Parmal Singh. She filed another claim petition claiming a sum of Rs. 3 lacs on account of the injuries sustained by her in the said accident. The age of the deceased Shri Parmal Singh at the time of the accident was 47 years and he was stated to be earning a monthly income of Rs. 21,000/- as he was posted as Branch Manager in the Oriental Insurance Company, Kurukshetra. Shri Sunil Kumar Divedi, driver of the truck chose to send his written statement by post and did not present himself. No specific plea was taken in the written statement except stating that the truck was insured with the New India Assurance Company. However, respondent Jagjit Singh, owner of the truck, took a stand that there was no negligence on the part of the truck driver and the accident had occurred due to negligence of the driver of the Maruti Car. It was also pleaded that the driver of the Maruti car did not have a driving licence and registration certificate at the time of the accident. It was further pleaded that as the wife of the deceased was getting family pension from the Oriental Insurance Company, she was not entitled to claim compensation. Respondent No. 3, the appellant New India Assurance Company, took a plea that Sunil Kumar, driver of the truck, was not having a valid driving licence on the date of the accident. It also took the plea that the accident had taken place due to negligence of car driver and compensation claimed was highly excessive. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :-

(3.) THE learned Tribunal on issue No. 1 came to the conclusion that the accident had taken place due to negligent driving of truck driver as he had applied the brakes all of a sudden. It was also found that Shri Parmal Singh had died on account of injuries sustained in the accident. On issue No. 2 the learned Tribunal found that the claimants were entitled to a compensation of Rs. 15,84,000/- In addition thereto, they were also held entitled to Rs. 10,000/- as consortium and Rs. 6,000/- towards expenses for cremation, performing religious ceremonies and transportation of the dead body. Thus a total amount of Rs. 16 lacs was awarded as compensation. Apart from it, a sum of Rs. 35,000/- was also awarded to claimant Smt. Meena on account of injuries sustained by her. However, on issue No. 3, it was found that as the Insurance Company had led no evidence to prove that truck driver was not having a valid driving licence, the same was decided against it. Against the said award, the Insurance company has filed the present appeals.