Telangana High Court
Union Of India And Another vs Smt. Swarn Kaur And 5 Others on 19 February, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A.No.1806 of 2008
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the Union of India, aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 12.12.2006 in O.P.No.251 of 2004 passed by the Chairman, Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad (for short, 'the Tribunal').
2. The respondents herein/claimants filed the aforesaid O.P. claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of death of one Mr. Ajit Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'). The appellants herein, who are respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the aforesaid claim petition, have filed the present appeal questioning the grant of compensation by the Tribunal to the claimants.
3. The case of the claimants is that on 12.07.2004, while the deceased was driving the Scooter bearing No.AP 10 AB 7707 near Karkhana, Secunderabad, the Military Truck bearing No.03D 51022K, took a left turn and hit the Scooter which was being driven by the deceased, due to which, the deceased came under the Military vehicle and the scooter fell outside the road. The co-driver of the Military vehicle shouted about the deceased falling under the Military vehicle and in confusion, the driver had driven the Military vehicle in the reverse direction and ran over the deceased, causing his death.
2 KS,J MACMA_1806_2008
4. After considering the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, vide the impugned Award, the Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.5,43,333/- with interest @ 7.5% P.A. from the date of petition till deposit, payable to the claimants by respondent No.1 to 3 therein.
5. Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the appellants would submit that in the circumstances of the accident, it cannot be said that the driver is at fault. When the person himself had fallen and come under the vehicle, the question of driving the Military vehicle in a rash and negligent manner does not arise. Therefore, according to learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, the Tribunal erred in holding that the appellants are liable to pay the compensation.
6. It is clear from the evidence of P.W.2, as discussed by the Tribunal, that the Military vehicle was overtaking the Scooter. When the vehicle had hit the Scooter, the Scooter fell on the road and the deceased came under the wheels of the Military vehicle. Then, at the instance of the co-driver, the driver of the Military vehicle had driven the Truck in reverse direction in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, resulting in running over the deceased. As a result, the deceased succumbed to injuries and died on the spot.
7. In the said circumstances of the driver taking the vehicle in reverse direction, even without noticing the deceased, it can only be 3 KS,J MACMA_1806_2008 concluded that the driver was negligent while driving the Military Truck and his negligence caused the death of the deceased.
8. I do not find any infirmity with the order of the Tribunal and thus, the appeal fails.
9. Accordingly, M.A.C.M.A. is dismissed confirming the order and Decree dated 12.12.2006 in O.P.No.251 of 2004 passed by the Chairman, Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ K. SURENDER,J Date: 19.02.2024 GSP