AMARJIT KAUR Vs. DORAJ @ GOPAL PARSHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Santokh Singh and four others hired truck No. PAT 1742 owned by Majha Goods Carrier, Amritsar for transporting their animals from Amritsar to Delhi. They started journey along with the animals on 22.6.1993 and when they reached near Gharaunda, truck No. CHW 3247 driven rashly and negligently by respondent Doraj alias Gopal Parshad collided with truck No. PAT 1742 owned by M/s. Khandelwal Goods Transport Company and in the accident, Santokh Singh and one other lost their life whereas some other persons sustained multiple injuries. The widow and three minor children of Santokh Singh filed a claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for the death of Santokh Singh. The petition was filed against the driver of truck No. CHW 3247 amd its owner M/s Khadelwal Goods Transport Company, the owner of truck No. PAT 1742 and the United Insurance Company.

(2.) Learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal disposed of the claim petition of the appellants and the petitions filed by others by passing a single order dated 31.1.1997. In the case of the present claimants, learned Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 2,68,000/- as compensation for the death of Santokh Singh. Respondents 1 to 3 were held liable to pay compensation jointly and severally to the extent of 50% whereas respondent No. 4 was hold liable to pay compensation to the extent of remaining 50%.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants only submitted that learned Tribunal was not justified in fastening the liability to pay 50 per cent of the amount of compensation jointly and severally of respondents 1 to 3 only and the liability to pay the amount of compensation ought to have been held jointly and severally of all the respondents. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Narinderpal Singh v. Punjab State through Secretary Transport, Punjab Government, Chandigarh and others, 1989 ACJ 708wherein the Division Bench came to the conclusion that Mukhtiar Singh v. Krishna Gulati,1987 ACJ 1961was correctly decided and the learned Judge was right in apportioning the compensation between the two joint fortfeasors by holding that their liability would be joint and several so far as the claimant is concerned. Another judgment relied by the learned counsel in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Kanta and others, 1997 3 RCR(Civ) 591 is also to be same effect.