New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Ram Ishwar Singh and Others

MAC. APP. No. 754/2011

Suresh Kait, J.—The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 7.6.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,26,872 with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued that the deceased Ajit Singh had not died due to the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle as there was contributory negligence on his part too.

Brief facts of the case are that on 15.3.2008 at about 5.30 a.m. the deceased was standing near his Tata Sumo bearing No. DLI VB4491 when a Truck bearing No. RJ14GB4527 loaded with the sugar bags driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner hit one Radio Taxi bearing No. DL 1RX 6090. Due to forceful impact of the accident, the loaded truck fell on the road and the sugar bags fell on an Indica Car bearing No. DL IV SA 8527, which was passing from there at that time. One sugar bag also fell on the deceased as a result of which he died on the spot.

Learned Counsel further submitted that though the accident had taken place between Radio Taxi bearing No. DL 1RX 6090 and the offending Truck bearing No. RJ14 GB 4527, but the learned Tribunal has failed to establish the aspect of contributory negligence on the part of other vehicles. Moreover, the deceased was standing on the roadside near his Tata Sumo at that time and had also contributed in the accident in question. Hence, while awarding the compensation, the learned Tribunal ought to have considered the aspect of contributory negligence as well.

It is not in dispute that FIR was lodged at P.S. Gurgaon under Sections 279/304A, IPC against the respondent No. 1/driver of the offending vehicle, i.e., Truck bearing No. RJ14GB4527.

The respondents/claimants have examined Shri Ram Ishwar Singh as P.W. 1, who tendered his examination-in-chief by way of affidavit. He proved the FIR Ex. P.W. 1/A, final report Ex. P.W. 1/B, list of witnesses Ex. PW1/C, statement of the complainant Ex. P.W. 1/D, site plan Ex. P.W. 1/E, death report of the deceased Ex. P.W. 1/F, the receipt of dead body Ex. P.W. 1/G. post-mortem report Ex. P.W. 1/H, mechanical inspection report of the offending vehicle Ex. PW1/I, the insurance of the vehicle in question Ex. PW1/J, driving licence of the respondent No. 1 Ex. PW1/K, RC of the offending vehicle Ex. P.W. 1/E and petition Ex. P.W. 1/M.

It is also not in dispute that a criminal case was registered on the complaint of one Sanjay, i.e., driver of Radio Taxi bearing No. DL1RX6090 the driver of the offending vehicle to the Higher Authorities. It is also not disputed that Radio Taxi as noted above was not met with an accident with the offending vehicle. The statement of complainant Sanjay has been proved by P.W. 1 as Ex. PW1/D.

For establishing the negligence of the offending vehicle, the learned Tribunal has relied upon the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Pushpa Rana and Others, , wherein it is held as under:

Negligence--Evidence--Admissibility of document--Certified copy of criminal Court, such as, FIR, recovery memo and mechanical inspection report of vehicle and documents of sufficient proof to reach the conclusion that driver was negligent--Proceedings under Motor Vehicles Act are not akin to proceedings in a civil suit and hence strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed in this regard.

On perusal of the record, it is established that as per site plan Ex. P.W. 1/3, mark ''A'' is the place where the offending Truck bearing No. RJ14GB4527 found turtle in an accidental condition and mark ''B'' is the place where the dead body of the deceased was found.

The fact remains that the deceased was standing on the side of the road whereas the accident had taken place on the road itself. Thus, the deceased had not contributed negligence in the accident. It is also true that the deceased was died due to falling of the sugar bag from the offending Truck which met with an accident with other vehicle, i.e., Radio Taxi as noted above.

The claim petition was filed u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and accordingly, the respondents/claimants have proved the certified copies of criminal record, i.e., FIR registered under Sections 279/304A, IPC at P.S. Gurgaon, as well as the charge-sheet, statement of the eye-witnesses, site plan, post-mortem report of the deceased and mechanical inspection report of the offending vehicle noted above to establish the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, being driven rashly and negligently at the time of the accident.

In view of the above discussion, I do not find any ground in the instant appeal. The same is dismissed accordingly. Consequently, the Registry of this Court is directed to release the statutory amount in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company and the balance compensation amount along with up-to-date interest accrued thereon in favour of the respondents/claimants on taking necessary steps by them.

CM No. 15711/2011 (for stay)

With the dismissal of the instant appeal, this application has become infructuous. The same is accordingly dismissed.