DHARAM VIR SHARMA Vs. CHHOTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the following facts:on 23rd July, 1992, Rani Singh since deceased the son of Tuhi Ram was going from his village Garoli Khurd to Gurgaon driving his Tempo Tata-407 No. HR-26/7196. One Devi Ram was also present in the vehicle as a conductor. At about 8. 30 P. M. when the vehicle in question reached near the Radha Swami Sat Sang Bhawan in the area of Village Garoli Khurd on the Gurgaon Patauli Road, a truck bearing registration No. HNQ-3252 driven by Vinod Kumar respondent at a very high sped came from the opposite direction. As a result of the head on collision between the two vehicles, Ran Singh received serious injuries arid later expired. The claimants who are the parents of the deceased, thereafter, moved the tribunal seeking compensation on account of the death of their son claiming that his monthly income was Rs. 5,000.00 p. m. and that the compensation was to be assessed accordingly.

(2.) IN the joint written statement filed by respondents No. 1 and 2, it was denied that the vehicle No. HNG-3252 had been involved in the accident. Respondent No. 3 filed a separate written statement also controverting the material averments made in the claim petition.

(3.) ON a consideration of the evidence on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident in question had taken place on account of the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle No. HNQ-3252. On issue No. 2, the Tribunal recorded a finding that the income of the deceased was Rs. 2,000.00 p. m. and after making an allowance of 1/3rd that he might have been spending on himself, the liability was to be reduced by 1/3 rd and that as the mother and father of the deceased are 40 and 50 years in age respectively, a multiplier of 15 was in order and having held as above, worked out the compensation at Rs. 2,40,000.00 to be payable by the appellants. The Tribunal further found that a sum of Rs. 55,000.00 was also due on account of damages suffered by the vehicle i. e. Tempo Tata-407 No. HR-26/7196. Hence, this appeal by the respondents.