PHOOLI DEVI Vs. INDERJEET SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 110 -D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is against the award dated 29.1.1986, passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, in case No. 60 of 1982, by which the Appellants were awarded amount of Rs. 1,06,100/ - as compensation. However, Rs. 53,050/ - were deducted on account of contributory negligence of the deceased Ramswaroop.

(2.) IN brief the facts of the case are that on 22.1.1982, at about 11.00 p.m. deceased Ramswaroop was coming on cycle from National Ball Bearing Company, and was going towards Sodala/Civil Lines, on his right side, a truck bearing No. DEG 444 was coming from the side of Civil Lines/Sodala Road and dragged the deceased at the crossing of Ajmer Road Bridge. Respondent No. 2, Dhanni Ram, driver of the truck, in his written statement pleaded that the cyclist was crossing the main road but did not care to see the truck and came all of a sudden under the truck. The insurance company pleaded that its liability was restricted to the extent of Rs. 50,000/ - only. The deceased, who was aged 26 years, lost his life on account of this accident. The Tribunal after hearing both the sides came to the conclusion that the accident had taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of truck, Respondent No. 2, but also held the deceased to be liable for contributory negligence. On basis of evidence, it was held by the Tribunal that the deceased, who was an employee in National Ball Bearing Company, was drawing a salary of Rs. 750/ - p.m., had a wife, two children and mother. An amount of Rs. 350/ -was deducted on account of personal expenses and dependency was fixed at Rs. 400/ -. While applying multiplier of 20 years, amount of Rs. 96,000/ - was awarded under this head. However, since the Tribunal held that the deceased was also responsible for the accident, therefore, 50% amount was deducted under this head and net amount of Rs. 48,000/ -was awarded as compensation to the claimants under this head. Apart from this the Tribunal awarded Rs. 2,500/ - to each of the claimants, on account of mental agony and loss of consortium. Thus the total amount came to Rs. 1,06,100/ -.

(3.) MR . S.C. Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of insurance company, frankly admitted that due to payment of additional premium, the liability of the insurance company is unlimited. It was contended by Mr. M.R. Singhvi, appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1 owner, that the Tribunal has rightly held the deceased to be responsible for contributory negligence. The accident took place at about 11.00 p.m. and the truck was coming with full lights on, which was enough indication to the deceased that a truck was coming towards crossing and he should have been careful also. He further referred to regulations 6 and 7 of the Act to stress the point that the deceased cyclist was also responsible to observe the rules as laid down in the regulations. It is further contended that the award calls for no interference and the amount awarded to the Appellant is justified on all counts.