BAKHTAWAR SINGH Vs. GURBACHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will also dispose of F.A.O. Nos. 487, 488, 489 and 491 of 1983, as all these appeals arise out of one award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra, (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'), and one accident.

(2.) JARNAIL Singh, deceased, was driving car No. MTY 8268 on his way from Bombay to his native village Dantauri on G.T. Road, the accident took place with bus No. PBJ 4413, driven by Respondent No. 1, Gurbachan Singh. In the said accident, the said Jarnail Singh, his son Amarjit Singh and two other persons, Amrik Singh and Gurdeep Singh who were also travelling in the car, lost their lives. Five claim petitions were filed. Claim petition giving rise to F.A.O. No. 487 of 1983 was filed on behalf of the parents of Amrik Singh whereas claim petition giving rise to F.A.O. No. 488 of 1983 was filed on behalf of the parents of Gurdeep Singh. Claim petition giving rise to F.A.O. No. 489 of 1983 was filed by the widow and children of the deceased Jarnail Singh, whereas claim petition giving rise to F.A.O. No. 491 of 1983 was filed on account of the death of Amarjit Singh son of Jarnail Singh, on behalf of his mother and brother. The fifth claim petition was filed by the widow and children of Jarnail Singh, claiming compensation for the damage to the car. So far the fifth claim petition is concerned, the F.A.O. arising thereof has already been dismissed because during the pendency of the appeal, the insurers of the car have satisfied the claim. The learned Tribunal dismissed these four claim petitions on the ground that the accident had taken place on account of the negligence of Jarnail Singh, driver of the car.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the claimants vehemently contended that from the evidence, it was amply proved that the accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus. He particularly referred to the statements of Gurbachan Singh RW 1, the driver of the bus and Bakhshish Singh, PW 1, in this behalf. He also contended that in any case, it was a case of contributory negligence and, therefore, the claimants were entitled to compensation from the State of Punjab as the offending bus belonged to it. However, in the alternative, it was also contended that the insurer of the car was liable to pay compensation to the claimants on account of the deaths of Amrik Singh, Gurdeep Singh and Amarjit Singh who were travelling in the car and had died because of the accident.