SANTOSH KUMARI Vs. YOG RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are directed against the same award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and, therefore, they are being disposed of by a common judgment. One appeal (FAO No. 146 of 2000) has been filed by the Insurance Company and the other (FAO No. 128 of 2000) by the claimant (now represented by his legal representative).

(2.) RELEVANT facts may be noticed. Claimant Pritam Chand was on board a bus, owned by respondent Swarup Singh, on 7.2.1996, when it met with an accident. The bus was being driven by Yog Raj, respondent. It was insured with New India Assurance Company (appellant in FAO No. 146 of 2000). As a result of the accident, claimant Pritam Chand sustained multiple injuries, including fracture of dorsal vertebra D12 of back-bone, resulting in traumatic paraplegia with hundred percent permanent disability. So he filed a petition claiming compensation to the tune of rupees ten lacs. The owner, the driver and the Insurer were impleaded as respondents. The insurer took the plea that respondent Yog Raj did not possess a valid licence to drive the vehicle. The Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, after holding inquiry, concluded that the accident had taken place due to the rash or negligent driving of the bus by respondent Yog Raj and that as a result of the accident, the claimant sustained fracture of dorsal vertebra resulting in hundred percent permanent disability and awarded a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- as compensation, with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the petition to the date of deposit of the compensation money and ordered the insurer to satisfy the award.

(3.) THE claimant filed the appeal for enhancement of the compensation. During the pendency of the appeal he has expired and his legal representative, namely his widow Santosh Kumari has been brought on record.