JOGINDER SINGH Vs. HIMACHAL GOVERNMENT TRANSPORT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punjab, dismissing the claim filed by Joginder Singh, 'whose son Kaka Singh, aged about 16 died in an accident on 11th of December, 1959.

(2.) TRUCK No. HIM -1015, owned by the Himachal Pradesh Government, admittedly was sent to Surajpur to load cement and transport the same to Rampur Bushehr. After obtaining the supply of cement, instead of going towards Kalka towards the left after joining the main Ambala -Kalka Road, the driver of the truck turned to the right, came to Panchkoola and was proceeding towards Mani Majra when. according to the allegations of Joginder Singh claimant, this truck -struck a cycle on which his son Kaka Singh was going to the same direction towards Mani Majra. Another boy, aged about 9, Sadhu Singh was sitting on the bar of the cycle. As a result of this collision the two boys fell down and suffered injuries. The injuries of Kaka Singh were serious. One Surjan Singh, who was nearby raised a 'raula'; (noise) on seeing the accident and shouted to the driver of the truck to stop, but the truck speeded away On his raising shouts Joginder Singh (different from Joginder Singh Claimant, hereinafter referred to as Joginder Singh I), who has land nearby and who had come with a pitcher to fill water nearby the culvert at a short distance from the place of accident, also came to the spot andra is -ed a 'raula' (noise). Two trucks came thereafter also from the side of Panchkoola. According to Joginder Singh I, the occupiers of the latter of the two trucks were told on enquiry that an accident had taken place with a truck loaded with cement. Soon after Joginder Singh claimant came to the spot, and in a tonga the two injured boys were removed to the hospital, where Kaka Singh died. Sadhu Singh recovered after three or four days. First information report was lodged by Ajit Singh, grandfather of Kaka Singh deceased. According to the statement of Joginder Singh Claimant, he and others came to know that the truck in dispute had met with another accident near Mani Majra and was held up there.

(3.) IN the written statement filed on behalf of the Himachal Pradesh Government the only point taken was that the Himachal Pradesh Government was not responsible for the alleged negligence of the driver resulting in the accident, because he had no authority to go towards Chandigarh and the accident, therefore, did not take place when he was acting for and on behalf of the Himachal Pradesh Government but when he was not on official duty and that his trip towards Chandigarh was a spree of his own. Thus no plea was taken that, in fact, the truck in question was not involved in the accident or if involved, there was no negligence on behalf of the driver. The following three issues were settled: -