Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Harbans Lal, J.
Delhi Bhiwani Transport Company Private Limited
Versus
Ram Nivas Surekha
First Appeal from the Order No. 89 of 1972,90 of 1972,
C.R. No. 403 of 1972,409 of 1972,411 of 1972,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 30, 1979
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - SECTION 95(2)(B), (4) - INSURANCE - LIABILITY OF INSURER - EXTENT - DEATH OR INJURY OF PASSENGERS - MAXIMUM LIABILITY OF INSURER - RS. 2,000 PER PASSENGER - AWARD OF COMPENSATION EXCEEDING THE LIMIT - MODIFICATION OF AWARD - ORDER 41, RULE 33, CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE - SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY - RELIEF TO RESPONDENT WHO HAS NOT APPEALED - CONDITIONS.
Fact of the Case:
A bus and a truck collided on a highway, resulting in the death of one passenger and injuries to five others. The legal representatives of the deceased and the injured passengers filed claims for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal awarded compensation to the claimants, holding the bus driver responsible for the accident. The owner of the bus and its insurer filed appeals and revisions challenging the award.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the bus driver was negligent and rash, causing the accident. It upheld the Tribunal's finding on liability. However, the court modified the award, reducing the compensation granted to the claimants. It held that the insurer's liability was limited to Rs. 2,000 per passenger, as per the provisions of Section 95(2)(b) and (4) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The court also granted interest at 6% per annum on the unpaid portion of the compensation from the date of filing the claim petitions.
Issues: 1. Whether the bus driver was negligent and caused the accident? 2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was excessive? 3. Whether the insurer's liability was limited to Rs. 2,000 per passenger? 4. Whether the claimants were entitled to interest on the unpaid portion of the compensation?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on the evidence of eyewitnesses and the police investigation report to conclude that the bus driver was driving rashly and negligently, causing the accident. 2. The court held that the Tribunal erred in awarding excessive compensation without considering the actual dependency of the claimants and the appropriate multiplier. It modified the award, reducing the compensation granted to the claimants. 3. The court interpreted Section 95(2)(b) and (4) of the Motor Vehicles Act to limit the insurer's liability to Rs. 2,000 per passenger in case of death or injury. It held that the insurer was liable to pay only Rs. 2,000 out of the total compensation awarded to each claimant. 4. The court invoked Order 41, Rule 33 of the Civil Procedure Code to grant interest on the unpaid portion of the compensation from the date of filing the claim petitions. It held that this was necessary to prevent injustice and to ensure that the claimants received fair compensation.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeals and revisions, modifying the Tribunal's award. It reduced the compensation granted to the claimants and limited the insurer's liability to Rs. 2,000 per passenger. The court also granted interest at 6% per annum on the unpaid portion of the compensation from the date of filing the claim petitions.
Harbans Lal, J.
1. This judgment will dispose of F.A.O. Nos, 89, 90, C.Rs. Nos. 403, 409, 410 and 411 of 1972, as they arise out of the same judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (hereinafter called the Tribunal), dated December 30, 1971.
2. Briefly the facts are that on January 25, 1967, at about 9.00 a.m. a collision took place between bus No. DLP 3053 (hereinafter to be called the bus in question) and a truck No. PNR 3958 (hereinafter to be called the truck) on the highway between Rohtak and Bahadurgarh near village Jakhota. Bhan Singh (now deceased), Ram Niwas Surekha, Smt. Devki Bai, Smt. Gita Devi, Pawan Kumar and Surinder Kumar were travelling in the said bus. Bhan Singh died instantaneously as a result of the injuries sustained at the time of the accident and the remaining others sustained some minor injuries. The bus belonged to M/s. Delhi Bhiwani Transport Company on whose behalf the appeals and revisions have been filed. Sarup Singh was driving this vehicle. The truck was owned by Ram Nath and driven by Randhir Singh. Both the bus and the truck were duly insured for third party risk. According to the version put forth by the claimants in their claim petitions as well as in the evidence, the driver of the bus was driving at a very high speed and in a wreckless manner. Another vehicle (also a bus) was also going ahead at a fast speed. Sarup Singh, driver of the bus in question, in his anxiety to overtake the vehicle in front was driving at a very fast speed. The truck was coming from the opposite direction. In the process of overtaking, the driver of the bus swerved the bus towards the right and as a result collided against the truck. Sarup Singh, the driver, did not put in appearance in spite of service and was thus proceeded against ex parte. The claim petition was contested by the owner of the bus and its insurer. According to their written statement Sarup Singh, driver, was not guilty of any negligence or rash driving, rather he was driving the vehicle at a moderate speed and was on the proper side of the road at the time of the accident. On the other hand it was the truck which was being driven in a negligent and rash manner. Suddenly the truck swerved to its right side and resulted in the collision. In spite of the attempt of the driver of the bus, the accident could not be averted.
3. The legal representatives of Bhan Singh, deceased, claimed Rs. 50,000 as compensation. Ram Niwas Surekha and Devki Bai claimed Rs. 20,000 and Rs. 15,000 as compensation respectively. The remaining three injured claimed Rs. 5,000 each as compensation.
4. In view of the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed :-
-
1. Whether the accident in question took place on account of the negligence of the bus driver or of the truck driver ?
2. To what amount of compensation and from whom the claimants are entitled ?
3. Relief.
5. Evidence was adduced on both sides. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the driver of the bus in question was guilty of rash and negligent driving which was instrumental in the accident resulting in the death of Bhan-Singh and injuries to five others. As regards compensation the legal representatives of Bhan Singh were granted a compensation amounting to Rs. 3.2,000. Ram Niwas Surekha was granted Rs. 4,000, Devki Bai Rs. 2500, Gita Bai Rs. 500, Pawan Kumar Rs. 500 and Surinder Kumar Rs. 500. Both the owner and the insurer were held to be liable in equal shares regarding the deceased and each of the injured. Both the appeals and the revisions above referred to have been filed only on behalf of the owner of the bus. The award has not been challenged either by the insurer or the claimants.
6. Ram Niwas Surekha, the injured, lodged the first information report with the police regarding the accident, copy of which is Ex. A.W. 2/1. It is disclosed therein that Sarup Singh, driver of the bus, in spite of entreaties by the passengers, continued to drive the bus at a high speed
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
