SAROJ DHIR Vs. VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this judgment I propose to dispose of FAO Nos. 1435 and 1436 of 1996 as these arise out of the same award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh.

(2.) ON 25th March, 1992 Pawan Kumar Dhir, since deceased, and Sat Pal injured had come to Chandigarh to attend some meeting at the Congress Bhawan, Sector 15, Chandigarh, in a private bus. These two alighted from the bus at 12. 40 p. m. just opposite the Congress Bhawan in front of the Government College for Boys Sector 11, Chandigarh, and started crossing the road towards the Congress Bhawan. They had just taken a step towards the Congress Bhawan from the road divider, when a scooter bearing No. HR 29-A 0011 being driven at a very high speed by Harinder Singh respondent No. 2 came from the side of the petrol-pump Sector 15, Chandigarh and struck against the legs of Pawan Kumar Dhir and Sat Pal. Both these persons fell down on the road and were thereafter rushed to the PGI where they remained under treatment from 25th March, 1992 to 3rd April, 1992. Pawan Kumar Dhir was thereafter removed to Kapurthala but he died on 6th April, 1992 as a consequence of the injuries that he had sustained. Two claim petitions were thereafter filed - one by the heirs of Pawan Kumar Dhir i. e. his widow, his minor children and the parents who all claimed to be dependent on him, whereas the second claim petition was filed by Sat Pal for the injuries that he had received on his legs.

(3.) ON the basis of the pleas raised, the following issues were framed in the claim petition filed on account of death of Pawan Kumar Dhir by the Tribunal: 1. Whether the deceased sustained the injuries because of the rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. HR 29 A 0011 by respondent driver as alleged? OPP. 2. To what amount of compensation, if any, the claimants are entitled and from whom? OPP. 3. Whether Harinder Singh driver was holding a valid driving licence at the time of the accident and if not to what effect ? OPr 4. Relief. The following issues were framed in the claim petition filed on account of the injuries suffered by Sat Pal: 1. Whether the injured sustained the injuries because of the rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. HR 29a 0011 by respondent driver as alleged? OPp 2. To what amount of compensation, if any the claimant is entitled and from whom? OPP. 3. Whether Harinder Singh driver was holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident? OPR. 4. Relief.