SUGNI DEVI Vs. DHANNA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above mentioned six appeals have been filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the common award dated 16.3.2005 of the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar and Additional District Judge (Fast Track), Beawar, Distt. Ajmer (in short MACT) in Claim Cases Nos. 85/2004 (old No. 140/97), 106/2004 (old No. 127/97), 104/2004 (old No. 82/97), 98/2004 (old No. 73/97), 1/2005 (old No. 70/97), and 94/2004 (old No. 52/97) awarding Rs. 1,000 to the claimant Basanti (appeal No. 351/2011), Rs. 35,000 to the claimant Sampati (appeal No. 1676/05), Rs. 15,200 to the claimant Deepak Kumar (appeal No. 1646/2005), Rs. 17,000 to the claimant Smt. Lata (appeal No. 1645/2005), Rs. 17,000 to the claimant Kumari Sunita (appeal No. 1635/2005), Rs. 25,000 to the claimant Sugni Devi (appeal No. 1656/2005) for enhancing the compensation awarded by the MACT. Since all six appeals arise from a common award, it will be proper for this Court to decide the appeals by this common order. Brief facts of the case are that the claimants filed claim petitions before the MACT for the loss suffered by them due to the injuries sustained in the accident which allegedly took place on 2.9.1996 between the bus No. RJ 19 P 1767 which was going to Jodhpur and Bus No. RJ 01P 0659 which was going to Ramdevra. As a result of the accident the claimants sustained various injuries on the various parts of the bodies. The said accident occurred due to the negligence of the drivers of both the buses. At the time of the accident the respondents 1, 2, and 3 were the driver, owner and insurer of the bus No. RJP 19 P -1767 and the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were owner and insurer of another bus. FIR to the incident was lodged at Police Station Pokran bearing FIR No. 149/1996 in which after investigation the investigating agency filed the charge -sheet against the respondent No. 1 for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A, IPC and Section 2/181 and 134/177 of the Motor Vehicles Act and the driver of the bus No. RJ 01 P 0659 namely Habib Mohd. died. Notice of the claim petitions were issued to the respondents and respondents 1 and 2 remained ex parte hence the order to proceed ex parte was passed against them and the respondent No. 3 filed written statement to the claim petitions and denied the averments made by the claimants. The respondent No. 4 did not care to file written statement and the respondent No. 5 filed written statement to the claim petition and denied the averments made by the claimants. On the basis of the pleadings the MACT framed as many as 6 issues and recorded the evidence adduced by the parties. Various oral as well as documentary evidence was adduced by the parties. After hearing the Counsel for the parties the MACT was pleased to decide the claim petitions vide its common award dated 16.3.2005. The claimants were awards compensation as mentioned above. For enhancement of compensation they have preferred the above appeals.

(2.) IT may be mentioned that the Co -ordinate Bench of this Court (Hon'ble R.S. Chauhan, J.) in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1642 of 2005 decided on 28.3.2006 and S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1638/2005 decided on 7.3.2006 rejected the appeals against the common award dated 16.3.2005 passed by the MACT, Beawar filed by Meghraj (Claim Case No. 101/2004) and Bajja Ram (Claim Case No. 93/2004), and refused to enhance the claim amount.

(3.) IN appeal No. 1723 of 2005 against the common award dated 16.3.2005 the Co -ordinate Bench of this Court (Hon'ble P.S. Asopa, J.) rejected the appeal by the order dated 16.10.2006 in claim case No. 5/2005 filed by Nootan and refused to enhance the claim amount.