MRS. PUSHPA Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY virtue of this suit, which has been brought in forma paupris, the Plaintiff claims a sum of Rs. 1,00,000.00 from the Defendant on account of damages arising out of an accident caused by the driver of truck No: JKA -27 belonging to the Defendant which resulted in the death of her husband. It may be noticed that the pauprism of the Plaintiff was upheld by the court vide its order dated May 19, 1969 whereupon her application was registered as a suit. In nut shell the Plaintiff claims the aforesaid sum on the following facts:

(2.) ON July 29, 1966 at about 4 -30 p.m. her husband Vijay Kumar was hit and run over by truck No: JKA -27 belonging to the State of Jammu & Kashmir at a place opposite to Head quarter 26 A.D. Coy: while he was going on a bicycle to Jammu city in connection with the discharge of his official duties. It is alleged that the truck was being driven rashly and negligently by one Janardhan Singh, an employee of the Defendant. Her husband was at the time of the accident on the extreme left of the road. As a result of this accident Vijay Kumar was crushed to death as both the front and rear wheels of the truck ran over his body causing several fractures and other injuries to his body. It is stated that the death was an instantaneous one. After the accident the driver of the truck was caught hold of by two persons, namely, Hav/clerk Gurdial Singh and Bakshi Bhagat Singh the I.P. driver while the driver was trying to run away. This amount has been claimed for the benefit of five dependents of deceased Vijay Kumar, the other four beside the Plaintiff, being, his minor son Avinash, his minor daughter Abha, his minor brother Dalip and his widowed mother Shri -mati Pan Kunwar. It is then stated that the deceased Vijay Kumar at the time of the alleged accident was posted at Jammu as S.D.O., M.E.S. B/E grade I drawing a salary of 473/ - per month out of which he was spending Rs. 373/ - per month on his aforesaid five dependents. It is also stated that the deceased was only 34 years old on the day of the alleged accident. He was fairly intelligent and was possessing a robust health. A bright future was lying ahead of him and he was bound to get several promotions and better grades during the course of his service. Although the Plaintiff and the other dependents of the deceased Vijay Kumar were entitled to get a sum of Rs. 2,17,329/ - on account of damages resulting from his accidental death, the details whereof have been given in the schedule annexed to the plaint, yet the Plaintiff confines the claim to Rs. one lac only. She then goes on to state that this sum of Rupees one lac can also be justified on the ground that in order to fetch Rs. 500/ - as interest per month, which is a sum the Plaintiff and the other dependents of the deceased were likely to get out of the earning of the deceased, a total sum of Rs. 1.04,000.00 would be required to be invested in a Bank. The Plaintiff has further alleged that she served a notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the Defendant on 8th June, 1967 which was never replied by the latter, hence the suit.

(3.) ON a consideration of the pleadings of the parties, the court vide its order dated 5 -3 -1970 framed the following issues: