DURGESH AGGARWAL Vs. DUNI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal on behalf of the claimants is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Faridabad, (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal') dated April 11, 1983 whereby a sum of Rs. 48,000/ - was awarded as compensation.

(2.) IN the accident on April 16, 1980 at 7 a.m. between the truck driven by Mahender Singh and owned by Duni Chand and the car driven by Suresh Aggarwal and owned by him, he and his wife Meera died. The claim petition was filed by their son Durgesh Aggarwal and daughter Geetika Aggarwal, both minors, through their maternal grandfather Lakshmi Narain Mittal, as their next friend. According to the claimants, the truck was being driven by Mahender Singh in a rash and negligent manner and at a very high and reckless speed. The truck driver suddenly turned it towards the right without giving any horn and without giving any prior signal. Suresh Aggarwal while driving the car was blowing its horn and it was on the extreme left side of the road. But the truck driver could not control it and there was a collision between the car and the truck. Suresh Aggarwal died on the spot and Meera died soon after reaching the hospital. Both the said two minor claimants also received injuries as they were also travelling along with their parents in the car. The truck was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited, while the car was insured with the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Both the claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 5,50,000/ -.

(3.) IN the written statement filed on behalf of the Respondents, it was denied that the accident had taken place due to rash or negligent driving of the truck by Mahender Singh. The version set up by them was that when the truck reached the intersection of bypass of Model Town at about 9 a.m. on April 16, 1980, the driver slowed down the truck, blew the horn, put his right hand out and gave the electrical signal to show his intention to turn towards the right side of the road leading to Model Town, suddenly car No. USA 4455 came from behind and struck against the truck. In order to avoid the accident, the truck driver had turned it towards the left side, but the car struck its central right side with the right front side of the truck. Due to the impact, both the vehicles went on the right side of the road. On the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues: