RATNA RAM Vs. MAJOR JAGJIT SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals (Appeals 11/83 and 27/83) arise out of common award therefore, they are disposed by common order.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to both the appeals are that on 7-H977 in the evening a j, Jeep No. 74-B/12369-H, of army was coming from Barmer to Balotra. The Jeep was driven by Constable Chandagi Ram (P.W. 3). At about 6.45 p.m. when they were near the V village Sindari about 5-6 kilometres away from the Balotra, they saw one truck No. RJQ 9886 coming with the excessive speed in a negligent manner. The claimant Major Jagjit Singh asked the driver to stand on the right side and the driver of the jeep signalled through the light to the truck driver. But truck driver still could not contain himself and struck against the jeep, which was stationary. As a result of this accident the Major Jagjit Singh (Claimant No. 1), his wife Mst. Shabnam (Claimant No. 2) and his daughter Namrata (Claimant No. 3) received various injuries. The first information report was filed at Police Station Sindari, Balotra and all the victims were immediately taken to the Hospital for treatment. The present claim was filed by Major, his wife Shabnam and daughter Namrata. The another claim was also filed by Union of India for damage to the jeep. Major Jagjit Singh has claimed that he was drawing a sum of- Rs, 2,000.00 per month. As a result of this injury his mobility has been checked, like-wise Shabnam received injuries on her head, right ear end fracture on her right leg. She cannot walk freely, claim has also been filed by Namrata daughter of the Jagjit Singh on account of damage of her teeth. Thus, total Rs. 30,300.00 was claimed for compensation against truck driver and Insurance Company. The claim was also filed by Union of India for damage to jeep to the extent of Rs. 8,740.64 paisa against the truck driver Ratna Ram and Insurance Company, Both the claims were opposed by Ratna Ram as well as Insurance Company and it was pleaded that as a matter of fact the accident has not taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck, accident has taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of jeep as such neither Ratna Ram nor Insurance Company is entitled to indemnify the claimant. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, six issues were framed by the Tribunal, which reads as under:

(3.) So far as the Issue No. 1 is concerned that the Learned Member Tribunal held that both of the driver of the truck as well as the driver of the jeep are responsible. The Issue No. 2 was decided in favour of the claimant. So far as the issue No. 3 is concerned it was decided against the owner of the jeep as well as truck and held that neither the owner of jeep nor the owner of the truck are entitle to be compensated for damage caused to their vehicles The Issue No. 4 was decided against the Union of India as it has failed to prove the actual damages and it was found that the claim of Union of India was barred by time. So far as the Issue No. 5 is concerned learned Member Tribunal awarded the compensation to all the the three claimant namely Jagjit Singh sum of Rs. 4,300.00 (claimant No. 1) claimant No. 2 Shabnam sum of Rs- 10,000.00 and claimant No. 3 Namrata Kumari sum of Rs. 2,000.00 for their injuries. So far as Issue No. 6 was decided against Union of India and the claim of Union of India was rejected.