SATYA WATI PATHAK Vs. HARI RAM
LAWS(DLH)-1983-2-12
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on February 25,1983

SATYA WATI PATHAK Appellant
VERSUS
HARI RAM Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

MAHINDER SINGH VS. MANJU SAWHNEY [LAWS(DLH)-1986-1-47] [REFERRED]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. URMILA DEVI [LAWS(DLH)-1998-2-50] [REFERRED]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. SHAKUNTALA DEVI [LAWS(DLH)-1998-2-51] [REFERRED]
DYER MEAKIN BREWERIES LTD VS. BIMLA GUPTA [LAWS(ALL)-1984-11-13] [REFERRED TO]
U P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ALLAHABAD AND VS. KM DEEPTI [LAWS(ALL)-1984-12-53] [REFERRED TO]
MILAP KAUR VS. STATE [LAWS(HPH)-1987-8-3] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD VS. MADHYA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION [LAWS(MPH)-1985-12-45] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. MAHADEB KAR [LAWS(CAL)-1984-9-18] [REFERRED TO]
COMMONWEALTH ASSURANCE CO LTD VS. NILIMA SARKAR [LAWS(CAL)-1985-7-19] [REFERRED TO]
ORISSA ROAD TRANSPORT COMPANY LTD VS. R K DAS [LAWS(ORI)-1989-5-11] [REFERRED TO]
PRASANNA KUMAR MITRA VS. PRAVATI KHATEI [LAWS(ORI)-1991-3-29] [REFERRED TO]
BRANCH MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. KAHAS BEHERANI [LAWS(ORI)-1996-1-24] [REFERRED TO]
PALLAVAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD VS. PANCHALAI [LAWS(MAD)-1987-7-32] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. RAM KHELAWAN PASWAN [LAWS(PAT)-1997-5-21] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRO DEVI VS. JIT SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-1988-4-23] [REFERRED]
SEETHA LAKSHMI KRISHNAN VS. GIAN PERKASH [LAWS(DLH)-1990-9-48] [REFERRED]
RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT VS. PISTA AGGARWAL [LAWS(RAJ)-1984-10-11] [REFERRED TO]
SAMPAT LAL VS. GEETA DEVI [LAWS(RAJ)-1985-9-59] [REFERRED TO]
USHA N. DADLANI VS. A. OBEROI [LAWS(DLH)-1991-8-85] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. USHA RANI [LAWS(HPH)-1989-8-15] [REFERRED TO]
SOHAN LAL VS. BAL SWAROOP BAL BHATNAGAR [LAWS(RAJ)-1986-7-76] [REFERRED TO]
PREM CHAND VS. JASODA AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-1984-9-36] [REFERRED TO]
UNITED INDIA FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. VS. KALSUM BEGUM AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-1986-8-14] [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR NAGRATH VS. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(NCD)-1996-6-125] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

Sultan Singh - (1.)This appeal under S. 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act') by the heirs of the deceased is for enhancement of compensation. The other two appeals F.A.O. No. 137 of 1974 and F.A.O. No. 174 of 1974 by the owner, driver and insurer of the vehicle are for the dismissal of the application for compensation filed under S. 110-A of the Act. This judgment will dispose of the three appeals.
(2.)On 15th May, 1968 Laxman Dutt Pathak, husband of appellant No. 1 and father of the other appellants died in an accident with Truck No. PNR 5057 on the road in front of Government Higher Secondary School, Karala, Delhi. On 14th June, 1968 his widow, minor sons, daughter and mother of the deceased filed an application under S. 110-A of the Act claiming compensation of Rs. l,50,000.00 and interest. They have alleged that Mr. Pathak on 15th May, 1968 was going in a bus from Delhi to Karala and at about 8.20 A.M. along with others he got down from the bus in front of Government Higher Secondary School, Karala, Delhi and was crossing the road for going to the school. At that time Truck No. PNR 5057 driven at a rash and reckless speed came from Delhi side and knocked 349 him down with its front portion, causing him grevious injuries and later he died. The truck was being driven by Hari Ram, respondent No. 1, and it is owned by Ram Narain, respondent No. 2 while it was insured with Oriental Fire and General Insu. Co. (Respondent No. 3). The appellants have alleged that the deceased possessed good health and had he not met with the accident, he would have lived a long life of 90 years, that the deceased was a Scholar and used to write books in Sanskrit subject for various classes and that his books were very popular and were prescribed as a course of study by the Directorate of Eduction, Delhi Administration.
(3.)The respondents i.e. the driver, owner and the insurer of the vehicle in their written statements have pleaded that the said truck was not involved in any accident on 15th May, 1968 ; it was on election duty on 14th May, 1968 from 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. under the orders of Truck Union Sisana; the truck remained parked at the office of the said Union upto 7.30 AM. on 15th May, 1968 ; one Rattan Singh of Kharkhoda booked the truck at about 8 A.M. on 15th May, 19G8 for loading buffaloes, and it left Sisana Union office at about 8 A.M. for Chamaria near Rohtak and reached there at 9.30 A.M. the same day; the truck remained at Ghamaria upto 10.30 A.M. and then started for Sisana Union office where it reached at about 12.30 P.M. and remained there upto 16th morning ; the entry to that effect was made in the office of the Sisana Union; the police seized the vehicle and arrested the driver on I 1th June, 1968. The respondent No. 3 the insurance company has also pleaded that its liability is limited to Rs. 20,000.00 per accident in terms of the policy.
;


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