Jasbir kaur vs Urjit Singh and Others

V.K. Bali, J.—The claimants who stakeda claim of Rupees Five Lacs on account of death of Fateh Jung Singh in a road accident lost their

cause before the Motor Accident-Claims Tribunal, Ambala and are, thus, in appeal.

On 25.5.1988, at about 7.45 a.m. Fateh Jung Singh as per the case of the claimants was coming on his scooter No. HNX 1623 towards

Ambala Cantt. on G.T. Road and when he reached near Omla Bridge, truck No. HYE 3245 came from the opposite side and struck against the

scooter of the deceased and thereafter the truck driver sped from the side of accident alongwith the truck. First information Report in this regard

was lodged with the police. The occurrence is stated to have been witnesses by Shamsher Singh and Charanjit Singh who were examined as

A.W.2 and A.W.3 respectively. After recording the defence of the respondent -- Insurance as also driver and owner of the truck, the Tribunal

framed issues on which the trial was held. While dealing with issue No. l with regard to rash and negligent driving of truck driver, the Tribunal came

to a firm finding after appraisal of entire evidence that it was unsafe to rely upon the testimony of Shamsher Singh and Charanjit Singh and that it

was a clear case of hit and run.

The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant -- claimants has taken me through the judgment and the evidence with a view to convince me

that the accident in question was on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck driver. As per the Tribunal, the sole reliance for returning just

the contrary finding is the testimony of A.W.2 and A.W.3 and A.W.2 Shamsher Singh in his examination-in-chief stated thus:

On 25.5.1988 at about 8.00 a.m. I was going to my village from the side of Village Shahpur on G. T. Road on my cycle, in the company of

Charanjit Singh. When we reached near the culvert in between Shahpur and Morha, a car was coming from the side of Shahbad while a truck was

coming from Ambala Cantt. Fateh Jung Singh was also going on the scooter and was proceeding towards Ambala Cantt side. While saving car

coming from the opposite direction, the truck coming from Ambala Cantt, struck against scooter of the deceased and I noted down the number of

the truck in my diary. I do not remember the truck number orally. (After seeing the diary) the number of the truck was HYE 3245. The accident

took place due to the negligence of the truck driver. Since the deceased was known to me I went to village Samalkha to inform his parents while

my companion remained at the spot. However, the father of the deceased was not available at the house. I, however, informed the wife of

Mohinder Singh about the accident and then I went away. Fateh Jung Singh died at the spot.

A.W.3 Charanjit Singh in his examination deposed thus:

That on 25.5.19881 was going to my village from the side of Village Shahpur on G.T. Road towards Shahbadin the company of Shamsher Singh,

while a truck coming from Ambala Cantt, has struck the scooter which was coming from the opposite side and deceased Fateh Jung Singh died on

the spot. The number of the truck was HYE-3245. The accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the truck. I have

taken the dead body to Civil Hospital, Ambala City and Shamsher Singh has gone to village of the deceased to inform his parents. I have taken the

dead body on the M.E.S. truck.

Even if it is held that the aforesaid two witnesses were present at the time of occurrence although the finding recorded by the Tribunal is to the

contrary and for good reasons, in my opinion no case of rash and negligent driving at all is made out. A reading of the statements of aforesaid two

witnesses makes it clear that no details of the accident were at all given. All that is stated is that a truck coming from Ambala Cantt, had struck

against the scooter which was coming from the opposite side and Fateh Jung Singh died at the spot. Whereas A.W.3 stated that the accident was

caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the truck and the truck coming from Ambala Cantt. had struck against the scooter, A.W. 2

stated that Fateh Jang Singh met with an accident on account of the fact that the truck struck against the scooter while saving a car coming from the

opposite direction. Besides the fact that the evidence of the two witnesses is contradictory, no case of rash and negligent driving at all is made out.

On may repeated asking the learned Counsel for the appellants could not from any other evidence show that it was a case of rash and negligent

driving of the truck driver. There is, thus, no merit in this appeal on the plea of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. However, it may

be noted that the accident took place on May 25,1988 when on account of no fault liability also, the appellants were entitled to get an amount of

Rs. 15,000/- and which amount admittedly was not allowed. The provisions of Motor Vehicles Act came to be amended in July, 1989 i.e. after

the accident.

This amount of Rs. 15,000/- was certainly due to the appellants. The learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has frankly conceded

that this part of the claim cannot possibly be denied to the appellants. That being so, this appeal meets with limited success. The claimants shall be

entitled to an amount of Rs.15.000/- with 12% interest calculated from August, 1988 when the application was filed before the Tribunal. The main

claim of the appellants, as referred to above, is declined and it is only an amount of Rs. 15,000/- with interest aforesaid which is held due to them

payable by National Insurance Company, Phuwara Chowk, Yamuna Nagar. There shall be no order as to costs.