KAILASH PURI Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants/non-claimants No.1 and 2 have preferred these misc. appeals under Sec. 173 of the M.V. Act, 1988 assailing the validity of the judgments and awards dtd. 21/12/2016 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pali ('Tribunal') in MAC Case Nos.230/2015 and 149/2015 respectively, whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petitions filed by respective claimants and the liability to satisfy the award was fastened upon the appellants/non-claimants No.1 and 2 while exonerating the non-claimant No.3 i.e. insurance from its liability to satisfy the award.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondents/ claimants filed claim petitions claiming compensation under Sec. 163-A and 140/166 of the M.V. Act, 1988 respectively on account of death of Ms. Chhotu @ Chhotu Kanwar and Sh. Guman Singh, who lost their life in vehicular accident which took place on 15/5/2015. The respondents/claimants in MAC Case No.230/2015 claimed compensation of Rs.4,34,000.00, whereas in MAC Case No.149/2015, the respondents/claimants claimed compensation of Rs.75,22,000.00 on account of death of their sole breadwinner Sh. Guman Singh. In the claim petitions, it was inter-alia stated that on 15/5/2015, deceased Ms. Chhotu @ Chhotu Kanwar and deceased Guman Singh along with their relatives at about 05:30 pm were coming from Jodhpur to Pali on NH-65 in a Scorpio Vehicle bearing registration number RJ-22-TA-2122. When the said vehicle reached near Nimbali Toll Booth, the driver of the Scorpio vehicle lost his control over the vehicle and it dashed into a blue bull [XXXXXXX] and turned turtle. The said accident took place due to negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, wherein both the deceased and other occupants sustained injuries. Ms. Chhotu @ Chhotu Kanwar died during the course of treatment and Sh. Guman Singh died on the spot. An FIR of the incident was lodged at Police Station- Rohat, District Pali being FIR No.98/2015.

(3.) On receipt of the summons, the non-claimants No.1 and 2, appellants herein, filed reply to the claim petitions while denying the facts stated therein for want of knowledge. It was stated that there was no fault on the part of driver of the offending vehicle and the accident occurred all of sudden, as a Blue Bull came on the road and dashed with the Scorpio, as a result of which the vehicle turned turtle. It was stated that the vehicle was insured with non-claimant No.3 and, therefore, the liability if any, was of the insurance company.