HARNAM KAUR Vs. SUKHDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present letters patent appeal has been filed by the claimants-appellants (widow and daughter of deceased Bakhtawar Singh)against the judgment dated 13th September, 1993 passed by the learned Single Judge vide with F. A. O. No. 984 of 1984 was allowed and award dated 12th October, 1984 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, ludhiana (for short Tribunal) was modified and multiplier of 8 instead of 5 was applied and the claimants-appellants were held entitled to compensation of Rs. 54,998/- (Rs. 48,000/- + rs. 6,998/- as medical expenses ). In addition, interest @ 12% per annum was granted from the date of filing of the claim petition. Facts giving rise to the matter in controversy are that claimants-appellants filed claim Petition No. 46/117/6 of 1982-83 under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (unamended) claiming that on 14th June, 1982 at about 8 p. m. , Bakhtawar Singh-deceased husband of claimant-appellant No. 1 and father of claimant-appellant No. 2 was going from ludhiana to his village Sunet on foot when a truck bearing registration No. P. B. L. , 3072 being driven by Buta Singh-respondent No. 3 in a rash and negligent manner without headlights hit a motorcycle bearing registration no P. U. M-3353 from behind and thus killing the motorcyclist on the spot. The truck came to a halt and the truck driver Buta Singh ran away. At the same time a local bus bearing registration No. P. U. R.-3628 belonging to municipal Corporation, Ludhiana-respondent no. 2 came from the opposite direction at a very high speed driven by Sukhdev Singh-respondent No. 1 and the bus slightly hit the truckf rom its right side. Driver Sukhdev Singh lost his control over the bus and struck one dhanna Singh, who was going on a bicycle on the left side of the road, as a result of which he died on the spot and then the bus further hit bakhtawar Singh, who was walking on the extreme left side of the road. Said Bakhtawar singh fell unconscious and was admitted to Civil Hospital, Ludhiana and thereafter he was referred to C. M. C. , Ludhiana where he succumbed to the injuries. The accident was witnessed by Mohinder Singh and dr. V. K. Nayyar, who happened to be on the spot at the time of accident.

(2.) CLAIMANTS-APPELLANTS (widow and daughter of deceased-Bakhtawar Singh) filed a claim petition seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 1 lakh against the respondents. It was stated that deceased-Bakhtawar Singh aged 50 years was doing diary farming and trading in cattle and was earning Rs. 2,000/-per month. Respondent No. 1 filed his written statement and denied the allegations for want of knowledge. However, he admitted that bus no. P. U. R.-3628 belonged to Municipal corporation, Ludhiana respondent No. 2, who also denied the allegations in their written statement and submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to any compensation from the respondents and further the claim was highly exorbitant. It was further stated that deceased-Bakhtawar Singh suffered injuries due to rash driving of the truck bearing No. P. B. L.-3072 being driven by Buta Singh and not their local bus, which was not involved in the accident at all. Plea of limitation was also raised. From the pleadings of the parties following issues were framed: "1. Whetherthe accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of driver Boota Singh (truck driver)? o. P. A. 2. Whether Bakhtawar Singh died as a result of accident i. e. , arising out of the motorvehicle i. e. , truck No. P. B. L.-3072? O. P. A. 3. If issue Nos. 1 and 2 are proved, what amount of compensation the claimants are entitled to? O. P. A. 4. Whether the claimants are legal representatives of Bakhtawar Singh deceased? O. P. A. 5. Relief. "

(3.) AFTER framing of the issues the claim petition filed by the present claimants-appellants was ordered to be consolidated with Claim Petition No. 77/32/7 of 1982-83 titled as Suraj Kiran and others v. Buta Singh and others. Learned Tribunal decided issue nos. 1 and 2 in both the claim petitions jointly and came to the conclusion that truck came in a rash and negligent manner, struck against the motorcyclist and it also struck against the bus which was also being driven in a rash and negligent manner, which further killed cyclist dhanna Singh and pedestrian Bakhtawar singh and the issues were decided in favour of the claimants. Regarding issue No. 4, claimant-Harnam Kaur and her daughter balwinder Kaur were held to be legal representatives of the deceased-Bakhtawar singh.