Undisputed FIR and investigation prove rash negligent driving sans driver testimony; incomplete ownership transfer holds registered owner liable; insurer indemnifies validly insured private vehicle absent breach.

JUDGMENT :

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

These appeals, arising out of one and the same accident, for involvement of common question of facts and law, are being decided
by this common judgment.

2. Parties to the lis, hereinafter, shall be referred as per their status before the MACT.

3. Claimants/petitioners in both the appeals are common.

4. On 28.8.2016, at about 10.30 A.M. Ghanshyam son of Thakar Dass, his wife Neetu Devi, Usha and driver Gian Chand were traveling in a Car bearing No. HP-06A-2153 from Village Darkali to Village Kotlu. When they reached at place Shalini Mod (curve), driver Gian Chand could not control the vehicle and it rolled down to deep gorge. Resultantly, there was total loss of vehicle and three persons, i.e. Ghanshyam, Neetu Devi W/o Ghanshyam and Usha died on the spot, whereas driver Gian Chand succumbed to his injuries in CHC Karsog after some time.

5. Claimant/petitioner Kamali is mother of Ghanshyam and mother-in-law of Neetu. Petitioner No. 2 Manish Khanna, petitioner No. 3 Poonam Kumari are son and daughter of Ghanshyam and Neetu. All three of them preferred two separate petitions for awarding compensation on account of death of Ghanshyam and Neetu Devi in the accident alleging rash and negligent driving of the car involved in the accident by driver Gian Chand.

6. Respondent No. 1 Boby Chauhan is registered owner of the car, whereas Leela Devi is surviving legal heir of deceased driver Gian Chand. Respondent No. 3 Insurance Company is insurer of the vehicle.

7. MAC Petition No. 18 of 2017, titled as Kamali and others Vs. Boby Chauhan and others was preferred for compensation on account of death of Neetu Devi which was dismissed by MACT vide impugned order dated 8.12.2023 with the findings that claimants had failed to prove rash and negligent driving on the part of car driver.

8. MAC Petition No. 19 of 2017, titled as Kamali and others Vs. Boby Chauhan and others was preferred for compensation on account of death of Ghanshayam, which was also dismissed by MACT vide impugned order dated 8.12.2023 for the same reason.

9. Assailing the impugned awards FAO No. 50 of 2024, titled as Kamali & others Vs. Boby Chauhan and others and FAO No. 51 of 2024, titled as Kamali and others Vs. Boby Chauhan and others ; have been preferred, respectively against even dated awards dated 8.12.2023 passed in Claim Petition Nos. 18 of 2017 and 19 of 2017, respectively.

10. Evidence in both Claim Petitions is identical except claim with respect to respective contribution/income of deceased Neetu Devi and Ghanshyam.

11. After completion of pleadings, following issues were framed by MACT in both Claim Petitions:-

Claim Petition No. 18 of 2017

“1. Whether the deceased Smt.Neetu died as a result of the accident took place on 28.08.2016 at place Shalini Mod (curve) due to rash and negligent driving of deceased driver Gian Chand, who could not control Ford Figo car bearing No. HP- 06A-2153, when said vehicle rolled down to deep gorge at about 150 meters? OPP

2. If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, then whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation, to what and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the present petition is bad for non