MOHNI KUMAR Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claimant-appellants in their petition sought compensation to the tune of Rs. Four Lacs by broadly stating that on December 7, 1983. Surjit Singh posted as Time Clerk at Anandpur Sahib Hydel Project was on his official duty and was checking the time of the vehicles. The Drivers of the vehicle were starting the vehicles with the help of each other. Vehicle No. 1 57 had already started and vehicle No. 1 25 was being started by pushing the same with the help of vehicle No. 157. Both the drivers were handling the vehicles rashly and negligently which caused serious injuries to him i. e. Surjit Singh, as a result of which he died. It was further the case of the claimants that drivers of both the vehicles were negligent and therefore, they were jointly and severally liable in causing the accident. Besides other, respondents Nos. 1 and 2 who entered appearance in their defence denied their liability to pay on the ground that the earth moving heavy machines called by the name of 'haul Packs' were involved in this case and these machines were used only for removing the earth mounds and were not covered by the definition of Motor Vehicle and, therefore, provisions of Motor Vehicles Act were not applicable. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Thus, framed issue No. 3 which reads : " 3. Whether the claim petition is not maintainable under the Motor Vehicles Act. OPR. " Findings on this issue have been returned in favour of respondents and against the claimants. Obviously, therefore, the claim petition had been dismissed.

(2.) THE sole contention of the learned counsel representing the appellants in the very nature of things is that the findings recorded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under issue No. 3 are erroneous.

(3.) THERE is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs.