Vinay Agrawal And Anr vs Kamla Bai Patel And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 3092 Chatt

                                                                                         NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  MAC No. 678 of 2015

                        Judgment reserved on 16.07.2021

                       Judgment delivered on 11.11.2021


1. Vinay Agrawal S/o. Kunjbihari Agrawal, aged about 32 years, R/o.
   Village Pithora, Police Station and Post Pithora, Civil and Revenue
   District Mahasamund (CG)

2. Vimal Kumar S/o. Kunjbihari Agrawal, aged about 36 years, R/o.
   Village Pithora, Police Station and Post Pithora, Civil and Revenue
   Distict Mahasamund (CG)

                                                                           ---- Appellants

                                             Versus
1. Kamla Bai Patel W/o. Late Thakur Ram Patel, aged about 55 years,
   R/o. Village Memra, Police Station and Post Pithora, Tahsil Pitora,
   Civil and Revenue District Mahasamund (CG)

2. Fagulal S/o. Late Thakur Ram Patel, aged about 28 years, R/o.
   Village Memra, Police Station and Post Pithora, Tahsil Pithora, Civil
   and Revenue District Mahasamund (CG)

                                                                       ---- Respondents

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Appellants : Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For Respondents : None

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor

CAV Judgment

This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act

(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the award dated

28.02.2015, passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No. H-35/2014

by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (CG).

2. As per claim petition on 23.11.2013, Thakurram was going to

Village Firangi in his CD Dawn motor cycle bearing registration No.

CG-06/B-4005 and when he reached near Petrol Pump of Lakhagarh

at Pithora, at that same time appellant Vinay Agrawal came there

on his Hero Honda Glamor motorcycle riding in a rash and

negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of Thakurram

from the back side, as a result of which he suffered grievous

injuries on his head and waist and thereafter was admitted in the

Government Hospital Pithora for treatment and during the

treatment, he died.

3. On claim petition being filed by the claimants under Section

166 of the Motor Vehicle Act before the tribunal. The Tribunal

considering the evidence led by both the parties, passed an award

of compensation and awarded Rs. 5,61,000/- with interest of 6%

per annum to the claimants from the date of application till

realization.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that respondent

No.2 Fagulal, aged about 28 years, at the time of filing of the claim

petition (who is the son of the deceased) was not the dependent on

the income of the deceased in any manner and hence no

dependency can be ordered to be paid. He further submits that

there is no evidence in respect of monthly income of the deceased

and the monthly income assessed by the tribunal is on the higher

side, therefore, the award may kindly be set aside. Hence, this

appeal.

5. No representation has been made on behalf of the

respondents/claimants.

6. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the

documents on record.

7. The Tribunal has relied on the statement of eyewitness of the

accident AW-1 Kamaldhar Patel. This witness has stated that at the

relevant time the offending vehicle i.e. Hero Honda Glamor

motorcycle was driven by applicant Vinay Agrawal in rash and

negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the

deceased. He deposed that from the said accident, the deceased

sustained grievous injuries on his head and waist and he was

admitted in the Government Hospital for treatment. In absence of

any challenge to such finding by either of the parties, the said

finding is affirmed. From the evidence of AW-1 Kamaldhar Patel,

where he has stated that Thakurram was riding his motorcycle on

his side at limited speed and when he stopped his motorcycle at

petrol pump then Vinay Agrawal came there while riding his

motorcycle at high speed and hit the motorcycle of Thakurram as a

result of which he sustained injuries on his body and ultimately

died in the hospital during treatment. No apparent fault on the part

of the deceased in riding the motorcycle in a negligent manner is

attributable from the evidence. Rather the evidence shows that at

the relevant time he was just slowly riding his motorcycle that too

on his side.

8. FIR was lodged in the police station Pithora by one Suresh

Kumar Patel, younger brother of the deceased immediately after

the accident. According to him, the accident happened due to rash

and negligent driving of Vinay Agrawal.

9. Miraj Hussain and Mandeep Singh were examined as defence

witnesses but they have not stated anything in support of Vinay

Agrawal and Vimal Agrawal. Vinay Agrawal was examined before

the tribunal in which he has stated that he suffered injuries from

the accident and he was also admitted in the hospital for about 21

days, but he has not produced any documents to this effect either

in respect of his admission or discharge. Doctor who conducted the

autopsy of deceased Thakurram has opined that the cause of

death was accidental in nature. No mechanical fault in the vehicle

leading to the accident in question has been attributed by the

defence witnesses. In the case at hand, the driver of the vehicle

has been found to be guilty of rash driving on public street and his

act unfortunately resulted in loss of a precious human life. Thus,

from the evidence on record it is apparent that the accident

involving the life of the deceased had taken place with the

offending vehicle and its rider was responsible for the same.

10. The legal position as regards the major dependent son as has

been expressed by the Apex Court in a recent decision in the case

of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Birender and

other (2020) SCC 356, is that even the major dependent sons

are eligible to be compensated in respect of motor vehicle

accident. This being the law laid down by the Apex Court, there is

absolutely no merit in the said argument advanced on behalf of the

appellants. Therefore, in view of the foregoing discussion the

finding of learned tribunal cannot be disturbed and the same is

affirmed.

11. In a result, the appeal has no merits and accordingly, it is

dismissed.

Sd/-

(Vimla Singh Kapoor) JUDGE

Jyotishi/Santosh