ARJUNRAM AND ANR. Vs. CHETAN RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed by the claimant appellant against the Judgment and Award dt. 16.12.1994 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Banner in MACT Case No.54/1993 whereby the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and has awarded a sum of Rs. 53,176/- as compensation payable severally and jointly against non-claimants No.1 to 3.

(2.) Brief facts of this case, are that on 10.05.1993, at about 3.00 P.M. Purkha Ram was going from "Nagana Tala (Bandra)" to "Chheetar-ka-par" in Tractor-Trolley No. RRQ 8589 which was being driven by its driver Chetan Ram rashly and negligently at a high speed, as a result of which, Purkha Ram fell down from the trolley and sustained injuries on his persons. The injured person was brought to the Government Hospital, Banner where he got admitted and remained admitted from 10.05.1993 to 18.05.1993, due to these injuries Purkha Rum died on 18.05.1993, at that time he was aged 10-11 years old. It is alleged that Tractor Trolley was insured with the respondent-non-claimant No.3. United India Insurance Company and the owner of the Tractor Trolley was Roopa Ram at the time of accident. It was further alleged that the deceased Purkha Ram was studying in sixth standard and he used to earn Rs. 500/- per month by doing the work at the shop of Poonma Ram. It was stated that due to his untimely death in accident the parents suffered a huge loss of income as well as suffered loss of love, affection and service. A report of the accident was lodged at P.S. Banner against non-claimant No.1 Chetan Ram for the offences under Secs, 279, 304-A, IPC and Sec.77 of the M.V. Act, The claim petition was filed by the father and mother of the deceased on various heads claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,77,710/- in the Court of MACT, Barmer.

(3.) After service of notices, non-claimants No.1 and 2, driver and owner of the vehicle, filed a joint reply to the claim petition denying all the allegations made in the claim petition. It was further stated in the reply that the said tractor was insured with United Insurance Company, therefore, in case any situation arises for the payment of compensation the Insurance Company is responsible.