KUSUM DOD Vs. BALVEER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of the appeal filed by the Appellant/claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated 6.8.2008 passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III), Shimla, praying for enhancement of the amount of compensation. This judgment shall also dispose of the appeal filed by the owner of the vehicle Balveer Singh against the award of the learned Tribunal allowing the claim petition filed by the claimants and directing the Insurance Company to deposit the amount in the first instance and thereafter recover the same form the owner Balveer Singh as well as the driver of the vehicle, namely, Tula Ram. This judgment shall also dispose of a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the Insurance Company against the award dated 6.8.2008 passed by the learned Tribunal directing it to deposit the amount of compensation and then recover it from Respondents No. 1 and 2.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a claim petition was filed by the claimant/Petitioners Kusum Dod etc. alleging that Yash Pal Dod, husband of Petitioner No. 1, father of Petitioners No. 2 and 3 and son of Petitioners No. 4 and 5, was traveling in a vehicle No. HR-58-7187 along with his apple boxes on 16.9.2005. The truck, when it reached at Atal (UP) on Tiuni-Atal-Nerwa road, met with an accident. It was alleged that the Truck was being driven in a rash or negligent manner by its driver, Respondent No. 2 and it met with an accident resulting in the death of the Yash Pal Dod. It was alleged that the deceased was of the age of 49 years and was working in Health Department and was getting a salary of Rs. 12,919/- per month. It was further alleged that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 30,000/- per annum from the orchard. The Petitioners claim that they were fully dependant upon the deceased and as such they claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 15.00 lacs.

(3.) In reply by Respondents No. 1 and 2 i.e. the owner and driver, it was pleaded that the truck had been parked on the road side and since the danga fell down suddenly, the accident took place. It was also pleaded that the accident had not taken place due to rash or negligent driving on the part of Respondent No. 2. It was also pleaded that the truck in question was fully insured with Respondent No. 3 i.e. the Oriental Insurance Company and as such the compensation has to be paid by them.