SONA DEVI Vs. PARTAP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A sum of Rs. 15,000/- is the compensation assessed for a wife, three minor daughters and a minor sister on account of the death of the deceased, who was husband, father and brother of the claimants respectively. What a princely sum of compensation of Rs. 3,000/- for a poor wife for loss of her husband. Three minor daughters aged about 6 years,4 years and 8 months will have to spend their lives with the fortune of Rs. 1,000/-each, assessed as compensation for them due to the death of their father. To say the least, it is a pittance. Despite finding negligence on the part of the vehicle driver he has been allowed to get away without any liability to compensate the appellants for having caused the death of deceased, who was husband/father/brother of the appellants.

(2.) On 16.9.1986, Prem Singh deceased was travelling in a four wheeler bearing registration No. HYB 3530 from Hansi to Tosham. This four wheeler was driven by Kartar Singh, Respondent No.1. In the area of village Hazampur, this four wheeler lost control and first hit a cyclist and then a Kikar tree before falling into a pit. As a result, all the occupants of the four wheeler received injuries. Prem Singh deceased was admitted in the hospital at Hansi where he died on 20.9.1986. First information report was also lodged with the Police. In the written statement, the allegation of rash and negligent driving was denied. It was pleaded that the accident took place because of a mechanical failure and was thus beyond the control of driver, respondent No. 1. The Insurance Company, in its written statement, mentioned that it was not liable to pay any compensation though it did not deny the accident that had taken place. Trial followed. Jagdish son of Chandgi Ram gave an eye account of the accident being an occupant of the four wheeler at the time of accident. As per his version, the driver of the four wheeler had lost control while saving a cyclist and had thus struck against a Kikar tree. Partap Singh, respondent appearing as a witness pleaded that the accident took place due to a mechanical defect in the four wheeler.

(3.) After assessing the evidence led in the case, the Tribunal concluded that the driver of the four wheeler was rash and negligent in his driving and, accordingly, the said issue was decided in favour of the appellants-claimants. Having done so, the Tribunal has apparently shown total disregard to the loss of human life. Referring to the evidence of Smt. Sona Devi, wife of the deceased, one of the claimants, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was no loss in income of the appellant claimant and hence held that they were not entitled to any compensation due to the death of the deceased. The Tribunal, however, was generous enough to award a meagre sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the wife, three minor daughters and a minor sister, to be shared equally as a no fault liability. The misfortune of the appellant-claimant seems to have continued. No one has put in appearance on their behalf at the time of hearing of this appeal.