S.K.MAHAJAN - (1.) This order will dispose of the appeal filed by the appellants against the judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 16/11/1987 whereby the claim of the appellants for compensation for the death of Narinder Kumar Malhotra, husband of appellant No.1 and father of appellant No.2 in a road accident alleged to have been caused due to rash and negligent driving of a car belonging to the USSR Embassy by its driver, was dismissed. A few facts giving rise to this appeal are: The deceased Narinder Kumar Malhotra on 6/12/1980 was going on his motorcycle at about 11.30 pm from Chanakya cinema side on Vinay Marg when a car belonging to the USSR Embassy and bearing registration No.75 CD 12 came from the opposite direction and hit the motorcycle of the said Narinder Kumar Malhotra. The car at the relevant time was allegedly driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver and accident was alleged to have been caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the embassy vehicle. As a result of the accident, Narinder Kumar Malhotra suffered fatal injuries and died at the spot. The appellants being the wife and son of the deceased filed a claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for compensation for the death of Narinder Kumar Malhotra in the aforesaid road accident alleged to have been caused due to the rash and negligent driving of embassy vehicle and claiming that the deceased was a young man of 26 years of age and was having a monthly income of Rs.1,000.00, the appellants claimed an appropriate compensation to be paid to them.
(2.) The claim petition was originally filed against the USSR embassy as well as the First Secretary of the Embassy who was driving the vehicle at the relevant time, however, because of the diplomatic immunity claimed by them, their names were deleted from the array of the respondents and case was contested only by the insurance company. The insurance company in the written statement did not deny the fact of the accident, however, it was stated that the accident was not caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the embassy car by its driver but was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of another car/taxi. It was stated in the written statement that when the embassy car being driven by the First Secretary of the Embassy was coming from Ashoka Hotel side to Yashwant Place side on the left side of the road at a speed of about 45 Kms. per hour, a motor bike coming from Yashwant Place towards Ashoka Hotel suddenly took an unexpected turn to the right side of the road and the driver of the car in order to avoid the head on collusion with the motor bike immediately turned the same to the right because on the left of the car there was a cyclist driving near the pavements. It was further stated that as a result of the car turning towards the right, the motor bike struck the embassy car on the left side door and the driver of the motor bike fell down near the left side pavement of the road. It is submitted that efforts were being made to take the motor bike driver to the hospital for treatment for scratches which he might have received as a result of his fall on the road, however, in the meantime another car probably a taxi came at a high speed and hit the motor bike driver kicking him forward. It was, therefore, submitted in the written statement that the driver of the embassy car was neither negligent nor the accident was caused for his want of care and farsight. On the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:- 1. Whether the deceased died due to the injuries sustained in the accident, as alleged in the petition? OPP 2. Whether the accident in question was caused on the date time and place, as alleged in the petition on account of rash and negligent driving of car No.75 CD 12? OPP 3. Whether the Insurance Company is not liable for the preliminary objections taken in its W/s? OPR 4. Whether the petitioners are the only LRs of the deceased? OPP 5. To what amount of compensation, if any, are the petitioners entitled and if so, from whom? OPP 6. Relief.
(3.) Issue Nos.1, 3 and 4 were decided in favour of the appellants. While discussing Issue No.5, the Tribunal observed that the appellants would be entitled to compensation of Rs.1,08,000.00. However, while deciding issue No.2, it was held by the Tribunal that the appellants had failed to prove that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the embassy car and since the embassy car was held not to be responsible for the accident, no compensation was awarded in favour of the appellants. Being aggrieved by the judgment of the Tribunal, the appellants have filed the present appeal.;