SUDARSHAN KUMAR PARSHOTAM LAL Vs. DARSHANA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the owner of truck No. PBN 297 against the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurdaspur (for short the 'Tribunal') allowing compensation to the claimants to the tune of Rs. 2,01,000/-.

(2.) THE claimant-respondents filed an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short the 'Act') claiming compensation on account of death of Doctor Surinder Mohan, who was holding a degree of Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicines and Surgery. After undergoing internship training for a period of five months, late Dr. Mohan had set up his practice as Ayurvedic Doctor at village Pandori Bainsan. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased Surinder Mohan had advised his patient, Ram Saran, to get himself x- rayed. However, Ram Saran failed to get himself x-rayed. The deceased Surinder Mohan told Ram Saran that he would be going to Gurdaspur on 6th November, 1983 for purchasing medicines and, therefore, he should contact him at Nano Nangal Bridge, so that he could be taken to Gurdaspur for x-ray examination. As decided, Doctor Surinder Mohan, deceased, arrived at Nano Nangal Bridge on 6.11.1983 and picked up Ram Saran from there. He accompanied the deceased Surinder Mohan on his motor-cycle, who proceeded towards Gurdaspur via Ranjit Bagh. When they reached near Baroda Bank Mandi Gurdaspur, truck bearing No. PBN 297 driven by Harbans Singh son of Inder Singh came from the opposite side. It was claimed that the said truck which was being driven rashly and negligently and was coming on the wrong side of the road, hit the motor-cycle of the deceased, as a result of which, Surinder Mohan fell down and received serious injuries. On account of the said accident, Doctor Surinder Mohan became unconscious and was taken to Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur, where he was declared brought dead. In this accident, Ram Saran also received some injuries. On the statement of Ram Saran FIR No. 150 of 1983 was recorded at Police Station, Gurdaspur, under Sections 304-A/279 IPC. The said truck was owned by M/s. Sudarshan Kumar Parshotam Lal and was insured with the United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Batala. The parents of the deceased i.e. the claimants along with Kumari Rakesh Bala and her other sisters filed a claim application wherein a sum of Rs. 5,72,787/- was claimed.

(3.) THE claim application was contested by the respondents and it was denied that the deceased was earning Rs. 2,000/- per month from his profession or that he was likely to get the Government job. The involvement of truck No. PBN 297 was also denied. It was further claimed that Tirath Ram, father of the deceased, who was practicising as Hakim at Samrala, was earning handsome income and was maintaining the family. It was, therefore, claimed that the claimants were not dependent on the deceased-Dr. Surinder Mohan. It was also claimed that the deceased had only a learning licence and, therefore, was not entitled to drive the motor-cycle on the G.T. Road. The respondents also took a stand that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the motor-cycle.