- (1.) The submissions of the Advocates appearing for the parties were fully heard on 4th May, 2006 and 5th May, 2006. Considering the fact that the appeal arises out of a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 arising out of a fatal accident, the appeal was taken up for final hearing at admission stage. The appellant-Insurance Company is the insurer of the tempo involved in the accident.
(2.) The appellant-New India Insurance Company Ltd. has taken exception to judgment and award dated 20th September, 2005 passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Sangli. The claim petition was filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 who are the legal representatives of late Jethanand Sidumal Kundnani. The said Jethanand was a resident of Sangli and was running a grocery shop in Panchashil Nagar, Sangli. The respondent No. 1 is the widow of the said Jethanand. The respondent Nos. 2 and 4 are the sons of Jethanand and the respondent No. 3 is his daughter. On 24th January, 1997 at about 11.30 p.m. the said Jethanand was returning to his house on a bicycle after closing his shop. He was proceeding by Madhav Nagar- Sangli Road. At that time, a bus owned by the respondent No. 8- the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation came from behind the said bicycle of Jethanand in a fast speed. When the said bus was overtaking the bicycle of the said Jethanand, a tempo came in a high speed from the opposite side. There was a collision between the tempo and the bus. As a result of the impact, the tempo gave a dash to Jethanand and, thereafter landed in a ditch which was on eastern side of the road. Jethanand along with his bicycle were also thrown in the ditch. The said Jethanand died on the spot.
(3.) The respondent Nos. 5 and 6 who are the owners and the driver respectively of the tempo filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. According to the case the respondent Nos. 5 and 6, while the driver of the bus was overtaking the bicycle, he could not control the bus and gave a dash to the driver side of the tempo. According to them, there was a failure of brakes of the tempo and, therefore the tempo went away and turned turtle on the right side. According to them it was the bus which gave dash to the deceased. Their contention is that the respondent No. 7 who was the driver of the bus was negligent.;