Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Chaurasia vs Bhagwan Chaurasia & Others on 29 November, 2013
Bench: Bharati Sapru
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 5
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 163 of 2005
Appellant :- Dinesh Chaurasia
Respondent :- Bhagwan Chaurasia & Others
Counsel for Appellant :- V.C. Tripathi,A.K. Gupta
Counsel for Respondent :- Ajit Singh,Janardan Yadav,S. Chaturvedi
Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.
This is an owners' appeal against the award passed by the Tribunal in M.A.C. No. 158 of 2001. The impugned award is a sum of Rs.1,52,000/- for the death of a victim who was aged about 15 years. The offender was also a minor of 15 years.
Learned counsel for the appellant who stand for the owners states that the Tribunal has wrongly come to the conclusion that the owner did not have a valid driving license. He states that the appellant had a valid driving license. But from the record it is revealed that the owner denied the accident altogether. The Tribunal has also come to the conclusion that this accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist who was himself a minor aged about 15 years, against whom a criminal case was lodged and he had also applied bail in that case.
Learned counsel for the appellant has sought to argue that no accident took place at all either by his motorcycle. However, this contention is not supported by evidence from record, on the contrary it is well established that his motorcycle was involved in accident and a minor was driving.
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the Insurance Company should not be given a right of recovery. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case when the facts speaks out so loud that a minor was driving the contention of the learned counsel cannot be accepted.
Such acts like this allowing minor children to ride vehicle without a proper licence, is fast turning into a menace for society.
Parents too have a duty to be responsible citizens and vigilant parents. It is their bounden duty not only to take care of their own children but also to see that their children do not cause harm to others by breaking laws and thereafter seeking protection wrongly in the garb of being a minor.
We frequently see today that minor children are being allowed to drive two/four wheelers by their parents without having a valid licence causing threat to the life and property of law abiding citizens. This is bad practice.
It amounts to wrongful encouragement on the part of the parents to allow their minor children to obstruct the law and break the law and in turn creates a certain defiant mindset in the children to break the laws with impunity which ultimately not only causes damage to the society but to the child himself or herself as it results in the stunted growth of an individual.
Such act of parents allowing their children to break the law is not conducive for a civilized society as if they are allowed to grow into law breaking citizens, they will turn into festers in our society and affect day today living of fellow citizens.
The responsibility for such acts is squarely to be fixed upon the overindulgent parents who being misguided offer to their children expensive gifts such as two wheelers and four wheelers even before attaining the age of majority.
Several studies on this subject have revealed that when adolescent children who are not of an age to drive, are given vehicles, have propensity to be reckless and rash and, therefore, meet accidents at their own cost and at the cost of others.
The legislature in its wisdom has, therefore, fixed 18 years as the age of majority for the grant of licence. It is obviously borne from experience that children are not mature enough to take good decisions while driving on the road, therefore their licenses are to be given to them in stages such as a learning licence and thereafter a regular licence.
Any parent who does not properly supervise his child is no doubt the real culprit for the negligence caused on the road when the minor child who drives without a license meets with an accident and causes harm to another person.
In such cases the parents are guilty, responsible and liable for contravening the conditions of road safety and, therefore, they should be held responsible for the compensation.
This is a justified price to be paid for being an overindulgent parent and for letting loose a minor child on the road without his supervision.
In the instant case, the parents not only allowed the children to drive motorcycle without a proper driving licence but also they tried to set up a false case that no accident had taken place, whereas it has come on record clearly that in this very case, an accident took place and a F.I.R. was lodged and the criminal case ensued which was contested by the appellant.
The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jawahar Singh versus Bala Jain reported in (2011) 6 SCC 425 has taken into consideration the facts which are similar in nature and held that it was the responsibility of owner to ensure that his motorcycle was not misused that too by a minor without licence. The above decision lends supports to the facts in this case also.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, I am of the opinion that it is the responsibility of the parents who are vicariously liable, for the loss and damages caused by their minor child as the parental failure to supervise is usually the cause of juvenile delinquency, as such the tribunal has rightly granted to the claimant a compensation for a sum of Rs.1,52,000/-, which is just and fair in the facts and circumstances of the case. The award is confirmed.
The appeal is dismissed as above. No costs.
Order Date :- 29.11.2013
rk/pks
