This appeal is directed against the award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Baramulla (for short the Tribunal) in a claim petition No. 50 of 1986 titled Mst. Hajra and others v. Dheeraj Singh and others.

The legal heirs (widow and children) of one Abdul Majid Lone filed a claim petition before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Srinagar on 22.05.1986 alleging therein that on 18.02.1986 said Abdul Majid Lone while travelling from Sopore to Panzalla had a fall from a vehicle, Bus No. 5521-JKC which was being driven by Deeraj Singh. The occurrence allegedly took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver/owner due to which said Abdul Majid Lone died on spot. It was alleged by the said legal heirs that the deceased at the time of his death was earning of Rs. 1500/- per month and was the main source of income and sustenance for them having the expectancy of surviving upto 100 years. The legal heirs therefore, claimed the compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the driver/owner of the vehicle and also from United India Insurance Company Limited Srinagar.

During the proceedings of the case a separate Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was created at Baramulla and since the matter fell within the territorial jurisdiction of that Tribunal the case was transferred to that Tribunal in terms of order dated 08.06.1988. The Tribunal on 27.04.1988 framed the following issues in the case:

"1. Whether on 18.2.1986 respondent No. 1 was rashly and negligently driving vehicle No. 5521/JKC near Hadipora, Sopore as a result of which the deceased who was travelling in the said vehicle fell down causing injuries to him which led to his death? OPP

2. On proof of issue No. 1 are the petitioners entitled to receive compensation from the respondents, if so, of what value and of what proportion ? OPP

3. Relief."

On conclusion of the trial the Tribunal found the legal heirs of the deceased entitled to compensation of Rs. 1,55,000/. The Tribunal accordingly granted the said amount in favour of the legal heirs of the deceased with interest @ 10% from the date of judgment.

Aggrieved by the said order the driver/owner of the vehicle has filed the present appeal on various grounds.

Heard. Consdiered. Various grounds were raised by the learned counsel for the appellant to assail the impugned order of the Tribunal. The learned counsel would argue that the order under challenge has been passed by a Tribunal which had no jurisdiction to entertain the claim and award compensation as originally the matter was pending before the Tribunal at Srinagar and that the Tribunal at Srinagar has without any authority and jurisdiction transferred the case to the Tribunal. It is further alleged that the Tribunal proceeded against the appellant in ex parte without issuing a formal notice to him. It is also argued that the Tribunal has not applied the correct formula while calculating the compensation amount as out of the total income 1/4th has been deducted as personal expenses of the deceased whileas the Tribunal should have deducted 1/3rd of the total amount of compensation. It was also forcefully argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the deceased has contributed to his death, as such, his legal heirs were not entitled to any compensation.

So far the point relating to jurisdiction and ex parte proceedings is concerned, I find no force in it on the ground that the Tribunal at Srinagar has validly transferred the case to the Tribunal at Baramulla. As said above, originally the claim petition was pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Srinagar. Prior to the year 1988 there was only one Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the whole of Kashmir valley and its headquarter was at Srinagar. In the year 1988 district wise bifurcation of the Tribunals took place and by means of SRO 165 dated 25.05.1988 a separate Tribunal was constituted under the provisions of Section 110 of Motor Vehicles Act at Baramulla. Since the accident in the presen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document