M/S.BRAHAM DASS Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the same judgment passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-(1), Kangra at Dharamshala.

(2.) The brief facts of the case as pleaded are that petitioner Randhir Singh was working as a mason and had suffered amputation of his right arm from the accident which occurred on May 31, 2002. The case pleaded is that claimant Randhir Singh was going to his house on May 31, 2002 in Bus No.HP-38-7674 being driven by Vikramjit Singh in a rash and negligent manner. At around 4.15 P.M. when the bus reached near Saw-mill, after crossing the Chaugan at Nurpur, truck No.HP-37-2049, driven by Milap Chand and owned by Gian Chand (both appellants in FAO No.394 of 2006) came from the opposite direction. This truck was being driven in a rash and negligent manner due to which drivers of both the bus and truck could not maintain safe distance between them, as a result of which the right arm of the claimant was struck and was separated from his body. It is pleaded that both the drivers Vikramjit Singh and Milap Chand were rash and negligent and responsible for this accident. The claimant was rushed to Civil Hospital, Nurpur, from there to the PGI, Chandigarh, then he was taken to Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana ('DMC' for short), where he remained admitted from 31st May, 2002 to 11th June, 2002 and was visiting this hospital for follow up treatment. The case was reported to the police at Nurpur on 31st May, 2002 itself and FIR No.167 of 2002 was registered. The petitioner claims compensation for medical treatment, for loss of his earning capacity, pain and suffering, quantifying the claim at Rs.20 lacs. Respondent denied negligence and the allegations made were refuted with a prayer that the claim petition be dismissed. Five issues were settled by the learned Tribunal on the pleadings of the parties. Two being the core of adjudication, namely; (1) whether on 31.5.2002 the claimant suffered injuries because of the rash and negligent driving of the bus as also of that of the truck being driven by the 2nd and 5th respondents before the Tribunal, (2) whether the claimant was entitled to the compensation, as claimed, or any other amount and if so from whom.

(3.) The other issues to be adjudicated were with respect to the validity of the driving licence of the 2nd respondent before the Tribunal Vikramjit Singh, and 5th respondent Milap Chand.