MAC APP.74/2006& 403/2011

Page 1 of 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

MAC APP. 74 OF 2006

&

MAC APP. 403/2011

%

JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON:26.08.2011

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

….APPELLANT

Through: Mr. Joy Basu, Advocate

VERSUS

KIRAN DEVI & ORS.

….RESPONDENT

Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Mehta

for R-1 to R-5.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be

allowed to see the Judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the

Digest?

A.K. SIKRI,J. (ORAL)

MAC APP. 74 OF 2006

1.

Respondents no. 1 to 5 are the legal heirs of the deceased

Sh. Lal Chaudhary who died in an accident on 23^rd April, 2001. The

deceased, on the fateful night, was returning back to his home

alongwith one Sh. Sushil Kumar in a TSR bearing no. DL-IRD-4940

which was driven by Sh. Shiv Mohan @ Pappu. As per the version

of the respondents no.1 to 5 (claimants before the MACT), Sh. Lal.

Chaudhary and Sh. Sushil Kumar had hired the aforesaid TSR from

2011:DHC:4385

MAC APP.74/2006& 403/2011

Page 2 of 6

Ajmeri Gate for going to Jahangir Puri, resident of the deceased.

When they reached Libra Petrol Pump, Jahangir Puri, it was about

1.45 a.m. A quarrel took place over the fare with Sh. Shiv Mohan,

driver of the TSR. According to the claimants, the fare was settled

at Rs. 70/- and to give this fare, the deceased had given 100

rupee note to the driver but the driver did not return the balance

amount, instead he accelerated the said three wheeler at a fast

speed with the intention to ran away without returning the

balance amount of Rs. 30/- The deceased tried to stop the said

three wheeler by catching the iron rod on the roof of the TSR. In

the process, the three wheeler which was at fast speed, over-

turned and deceased was pressed under it. He was taken to

BGRM Hospital where he was declared as “brought dead”. It is not

in dispute that the said TSR was insured by the appellant herein. In

these circumstances, the claimants filed the claim in the Court of

MACT impleading Sh. Shiv Mohan as respondent no.1, Sh. Khushi

Ram, (owner of the TSR) as respondent no.2 and the appellant

Insurance Company as respondent no.3.

2.

The claim of the claimants was contested by the

respondent. However, after certain few hearings, the

respondent no.6 and 7 herein i.e. driver and owner of TSR stopped

appearing and were proceeded ex-parte. The appellant,

accordingly was the sole contestant.

2011:DHC:4385

MAC APP.74/2006& 403/2011

Page 3 of 6

3.

On the basis of the pleadings, following three issues were

framed:-

(i)

Whether Lal Chaudhary died after fatal injuries in

the road accident caused due to rash and

negligent driving of three wheeler scooter no.

DL1RD-4940 by R1 on 23/4/2001 at about 1.45

AM at in front of Libra Petrol Pump, GTK Road,

Jahangir Puri?.

(ii)

To what amount of compensation the petitioners

are entitled, if so, from whom?

(iii)

Relief.

4.

Insofar as issue no.(i) is concerned, Sh. Sushil Kumar, who

was accompanying the deceased appeared as PW-1. He was the

eye witness to the accident and deposed the manner in which the

accident took place, as noted above. His deposition was

corroborated by the chargesheet Ex. P-1 which mentions PW-1 as

the complainant and the eye witness to the accident. On the basis

of his testimony and testimony of other witnesses, the learned

MACT returned the finding on issue no.1 in favour of the claimants

holding that the deceased died after receiving fatal injuries in the

road accident because of the rash and negligent driving of the TSR

driver. The defence of the appellant herein was that facts as

established on record would show that it was a case of culpable

homicide or murder of the deceased than the road traffic accident

2011:DHC:4385

MAC APP.74/20