STATE OF HARYANA Vs. NARESH KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 had filed a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') against appellants and respondent No. 7. The claim petition arose because of a vehicular accident which took place on 6.7.98 at about 5.30 p.m. near Bus Stand, Kurukshetra in front of the petrol pump of village Ratgal, on Pipli-Kurukshetra Road. Shankar Das, husband of respondent No. 1, father of respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 and son of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 received fatal injuries in the said accident. The deceased was going on his scooter when he was dashed by the bus driven by respondent No. 7 and owned by appellants. It is the case of the claimants-respondents that the deceased was driving his scooter at a slow speed and on the correct side of the road and when he reached the place of accident, a bus came from behind the scooter and the bus was run in a rash and negligent manner. Because of this, the bus dashed against the scooter driven by the deceased which caused multiple injuries to the deceased.

(2.) The claimants-respondents contended that the deceased was 36 years of age and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 13,000 excluding overtime and other allowances and since he had a large family to support, the claimants-respondents had claimed Rs. 35,00,000 as compensation.

(3.) The respondents have contended that driver of the bus was not negligent. It is contended that the deceased had given a signal to the driver of the bus for overtaking his scooter but suddenly he turned his scooter towards the wrong side without giving any signal and hence the said accident was caused. The quantum of compensation has also been challenged. The Tribunal found that the bus driver was driving his bus in rash and negligent manner and awarded a sum of Rs. 15,46,000 with costs and interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum to the claimants. Being aggrieved by the award of the Tribunal, the appellants have filed this appeal before this court.