R.R.K.TRIVEDI, J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred against the award dated 22/03/1980 given by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bareilly in Claim Petition No. 5 of 1978 filed by respondents 1 to 4.
(2.) The facts in brief giving rise to the aforesaid Claim Petition are that on 6-121977 at about 8.30 p.m., one Sri Honkeshwar Singh who was employed as a Mistri in the Wagon-shed of North-Eastern Railways, Izzatnagar, Bareilly was hit by Jeep No. USE 6123 which was driven by respondent 5, Prem Singh Rawat. Sri Honkeshwar Singh was aged 35 years, who was badly injured and succumbed to the injuries after about two hours of the accident. Jeep was owned by the appellants and at the relevant time it was in possession of the Sales-tax Department of U.P. State. The Claim Petition was filed by the widow of the deceased Hari Singh and Devi Singh, his two minor sons and Smt. Kethi Devi, the mother of the deceased. The case of the claimants was that the deceased was going on a bicycle on the left side of the road. The aforesaid jeep was driven rashly and negligently, it came to the extreme right side and dashed against the deceased, causing his death. It was stated in the claim petition that the deceased was earning Rs.611.50 paise per month as salary and all the claimants were dependent on the income of the deceased.
(3.) The Claim Petition was resisted by the appellants inter alia on the Allegations that at the relevant time, the jeep was allotted to the office of Assistant Commissioner, Sales-tax for the official purposes. On 6-12-1977, Shri A. D. Sharma, Sales-tax Officer, Bareilly had taken the jeep for the survey work after obtaining the necessary permission and had returned at 6 p.m. The driver respondent 5 was instructed to keep the jeep in garage. The jeep was however, taken out by the driver without permission and information to the officer of the Department. It was also alleged that at the relevant time, driver was badly drunk. The driver dashed against a rickshaw before causing accident resulting in death of the deceased. It was pleaded that the appellants 1 to 3 were not liable to any compensation for the unauthorised and illegal action of their driver. It was also alleged that the amount claimed is imaginary and exorbitant.;