SHANKER RAO Vs. BABULAL FOUZDAR
LAWS(MPH)-1980-3-16
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on March 28,1980

SHANKER RAO Appellant
VERSUS
BABULAL FOUZDAR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SECRETARY OF STATE V. GOKAL CHAND [REFERRED TO]
P.B. KEDAR V. THATCHAMMA [REFERRED TO]
MEGJIBHAI KHIMJI VIRA V. CHATURBHAI TALLABHAI [REFERRED TO]
GOBALD MOTOR SERVICE LIMITED VS. R M K VELUSWAMI [REFERRED TO]
C K SUBRAMANIA IYER VS. T KUNHIKUTTAN NAIR [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. SHANT1 MISRA ADULT [REFERRED TO]
KASTURILAL GOPALDAS VS. PRABHAKAR MARTAND PATKI [REFERRED TO]
MANGILAL VS. PARASRAM [REFERRED TO]
KAMLA DEVI VS. KISHANCHAND [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF M P VS. PEHLAJRAI DWARKADAS [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWATIDIN GANGADIN VS. GHEESALAL NATHULAL [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMED HABIBULLAH VS. SEETHAMMAL [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

RAM KISHORE GUPTA VS. MUNSHI RAM [LAWS(P&H)-2006-7-443] [REFERRED TO]
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD VS. ROOP KANWAR [LAWS(RAJ)-1990-8-31] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI BINOD KUMAR AGARWAL, SON OF LATE K.R. AGARWAL VS. SHRI RATNA KUMAR CHETTRI [LAWS(SIK)-2017-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
KHIROD NAYAK VS. COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN [LAWS(ORI)-1991-4-19] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD VS. BAGDIBAI [LAWS(MPH)-1985-1-4] [REFERRED TO]
DIV MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSU CO VS. BISWANATH BURMAN [LAWS(ORI)-1996-10-2] [REFERRED TO]
SHAKUNTLA VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY [LAWS(RAJ)-1988-9-39] [REFERRED TO]
CHHABDA BUS SERVICE SENDHWA VS. RANG PANCHAM [LAWS(MPH)-1986-8-26] [REFERRED TO]
B D GUPTA ADVOCATE VS. RATANLAL BIHARI [LAWS(MPH)-1982-3-28] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD VS. RAGDIBAI [LAWS(MPH)-1985-1-39] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH KHATI VS. SANTOSH CHETRY [LAWS(SIK)-2023-6-8] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA IASSURANCE CO LTD VS. NEERA DABUR [LAWS(ALL)-2004-12-106] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL FIRE AND GENERAL INS CO VS. NANI BALA DEVI [LAWS(GAU)-1987-1-4] [REFERRED TO]
FIZABAI VS. NEMICHAND [LAWS(MPH)-1992-10-26] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. AVIPSA PATHAK [LAWS(SIK)-2024-3-4] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. SUDARSAN BHUYAN [LAWS(ORI)-1991-2-11] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHANDRA VS. MADHYA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONBHOPAL [LAWS(MPH)-1982-4-20] [REFERRED TO]
Narayanappa, Major, S/o. late Yellappa, Sulkunte Village, Dommasandra Post, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore Dist. VS. S. Dhanapalam, Major, S/o. C Subramani, No. 21/3, Shivaganga Matt Road, Chamarajpet, Bangalore-560 018. and The Regional Manager, M/s. [LAWS(KAR)-2010-11-128] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

J.S.Verma, J. - (1.)This Is a claimant's appeal under Section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated 12-3-1976 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal East Nimar, Khandwa in Claims Case No. 12 of 1974 dismissing the entire claim for compensation made under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act,
(2.)The motor accident giving rise to the claim occurred on 26-1-1974 when deceased Ambadas was knocked down by a bus MFC 4757 which came from behind. Ambadas when he was walking on the correct side of the road at Khandwa near the Bus stand. The deceased Ambadas was a peon in the Government Irrigation Department and was aged about 40 years at the time of his death. He was drawing in all Rs. 196/-per month as his salary. The deceased succumbed to his injuries soon after the accident in which he was crushed under the front wheel. The deceased was unmarried and the sole claimant Shanker Rao is his elder brother. The claimant alleged that he was being paid Rs. 100/- per month by the deceased for meeting the house hold and other expenses. On this basis a claim for compensation had been made by him as a result of death of Ambadas. Respondent No. 1 is the owner, respondent No, 2 is the driver and respondent No, 3 is the insurer of the offending bus.
(3.)The Tribunal has held that the accident occurred entirely on account of negligence of the bus driver and the deceased Ambadas died as a result of injuries sustained by him in that accident. It has further been held that respondent No. 2 Hari Prasad who was driving the bus had no driving licence and he 'was also not an employee of the insured. Accordingly the insurer has been absolved from liability for payment of any compensation. It has also been held that the claimant being the brother of the deceased, ha was not entitled to recover any compensation as there was no pecuniary loss to him and a brother is not entitled to claim compensation under Section 1-A of the Fatal Accidents Act On this reason alone the entire claim has been dismissed against all the respondents. That has led to the filing of this appeal by the claimant.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.