SUDERSHAN JHAM Vs. JAGDISH BAIRWA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant-owner of Tractor in question under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the impugned award dated 22.6.2004 passed by the MACT, Baran District, Baran, in claim case No.33/2003, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,29,000/- as compensation in favour of claimant respondent No.3-Nemichand.

(2.) The brief facts as emerging on the face of record are that a claim petition came to be filed by claimant-Nemichand(injured) before the Tribunal alleging therein that in the morning of 22.12.2002, as usual he along with other labourers was standing at Deendayal Park in search of labour/work. At that time, Jagdish driver of Tractor bearing No. R.J. 20 R-2030 along with trolly came there and took injured Nemichand, Shaitan Bheel & others in the trolly for labour work and after working when they were returning, in front of house of Satish Sindhi, driver Jagdish who was driving the tractor in a rash and negligent manner caused the trolly to turn up side down, as a result of which Nemichand got serious injury on his right leg. It is mentioned in the claim petition that injured Nemichand was a healthy man aged 35 years at the time of accident and was earning Rs.3000/- per month. The whole family of the injured was dependent on his income and due to this accident his right leg was amputated from the knee and he sustained 100% disability. In the claim petition it was prayed that a sum of Rs.11,62,000/- be awarded as compensation.

(3.) The non-petitioners Nos. 1 & 2 filed their reply to the claim petition denying the averments made in the claim petition and pleaded ignorance about the family status of the claimant but averred that the non-petitioner No.1 was having a valid driving licence and at the time of accident he was under the employment of owner of the tractor (non-petitioner No.2) and the accident took place due to negligence of injured Nemichand and if, in case any liability arises on account of the accident, then non-petitioner No.3 Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation, as the tractor was insured with the Insurance Company.